Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]


Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 6
  • 10
The mystery of Stockland
Topic Started: 28 Aug 2012, 12:58 PM (9,822 Views)
Count du Monet
Member Avatar


peter fraser
29 Aug 2012, 09:45 PM
That is incorrect, the developer pays all of the direct costs including roads.

The extra infrastructure you refer to are costs such as hospitals and schools, policing, fire brigade etc, but that would not be needed on every subdivision. The local council gets an immediate cash flow benefit in rates, and the state governments gains in property transactional duties.


Yes, and it's 25k worth......big deal.

No one asked for developers to come along, they intruded on the house seen in early 1960's. They were the ones that wanted to develop suburbs.

They want to sell finished blocks, it's them that want to make it salable. They'd just like the government to pay them to make their block salable. It's them if they're not happy with it can do us all a favor and piss off!

But none of that matters, what does matter is what the real costs are, and little you say adds up to anything other than a sob story.
The next trick of our glorious banks will be to charge us a fee for using net bank!!!
You are no longer customer, you are property!!!

Don't be SAUCY with me Bernaisse
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
mel
Member Avatar


Count du Monet
29 Aug 2012, 11:08 PM
And a single house blocks share of conduits is about 25k. It can be done pricier if you like it that way.
You made a fair point earlier regarding the type of estate they are doing.
Some of the melbourne fhb estates are full of 400sqm / 12m frontage/super narrow roads on flat land with ample land release at a time.
With these specs/sheer volume who knows what these guys might actually be paying with some shopping around.

Future disaster zones with zero character - i guess that's where the money is for them at the moment.
Edited by mel, 29 Aug 2012, 11:39 PM.
APF - a place where serious people don't take themselves too seriously. There's nothing else like it.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Joseph
Default APF Avatar


Count du Monet
29 Aug 2012, 11:16 PM
Yes, and it's 25k worth......big deal.

No one asked for developers to come along, they intruded on the house seen in early 1960's. They were the ones that wanted to develop suburbs.

They want to sell finished blocks, it's them that want to make it salable. They'd just like the government to pay them to make their block salable. It's them if they're not happy with it can do us all a favor and piss off!

But none of that matters, what does matter is what the real costs are, and little you say adds up to anything other than a sob story.
Can i just say this thread is utter horse shit. I have seen fucking driveways cost more then 25k. Let alone land cost, development, compaction, planning, consultation, approvals, underground electrical, water, sewage, storm water, roads, kerbing, parks, etc. etc. etc. that goes into every land development. Sure it's probably not 200k per block, but it's defiantly not 25k. Give us a break.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
barns
Member Avatar


peter fraser
29 Aug 2012, 02:38 PM
Farmers occasionally do try their hand at greefield developments, and some do OK. I have financed a few over the years, and in the country they can do quite well. They also have an income from crops during the holding period, which helps a lot.

They often have an easier road getting the DA as they might have a mate on the council who can help them, but after that it's more difficult for them. Areas like finance, marketing, planning, project management are not in their usual skillset - and I'm not having a go at farmers, most people don't have any experience with those skills.

I don't think that anyone should sympathise with developers who lose it all, it's part of the risk that they take, but to run up a few meaningless figures on an internet forum, as has been done here, and declare that they all make a fortune is more than a little simplistic and it completely disregards the high level of risk involved.
I was involved in a subdivision of some farm land into high value 1 acre housing blocks on the outskirts of a city. The owners were people of substantial means (money made prior to buying the farm land), which was fortunate as it was an extremely expensive undertaking beset with long council delays. Not something a 'normal' farming family could or should take on. Costs for roading, curbing and services are mind blowing and must be paid upfront.

Part of the the problem is that the lead time is a couple of years so not only do you have to pay upfront for all the costs but also gamble on what the market conditions will be when you are able to sell. Your margins can disappear with mildly adverse market conditions.

The project was very profitable but more from rising property values over the period it took than necessarily the activity itself.

NB this was in the late 90s and over into the early 2000s and not in Australia so you may discount this anecdote. Having said that, I don't believe it would be any easier or cheaper now or in Australia.
“You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means” - Inigo Montoya
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
mel
Member Avatar


Joseph
29 Aug 2012, 11:51 PM
Can i just say this thread is utter horse shit. I have seen fucking driveways cost more then 25k. Let alone land cost, development, compaction, planning, consultation, approvals, underground electrical, water, sewage, storm water, roads, kerbing, parks, etc. etc. etc. that goes into every land development. Sure it's probably not 200k per block, but it's defiantly not 25k. Give us a break.
No ones talking about initial land cost (which may well be be significant). This is purely about the cost of developing previous farmland or a wasteland previously zoned farming. The parks don't cost shit to put together - they were already there and represent part of the overall deal.
Edited by mel, 30 Aug 2012, 12:07 AM.
APF - a place where serious people don't take themselves too seriously. There's nothing else like it.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Count du Monet
Member Avatar


Joseph
29 Aug 2012, 11:51 PM
Can i just say this thread is utter horse shit. I have seen fucking driveways cost more then 25k. Let alone land cost, development, compaction, planning, consultation, approvals, underground electrical, water, sewage, storm water, roads, kerbing, parks, etc. etc. etc. that goes into every land development. Sure it's probably not 200k per block, but it's defiantly not 25k. Give us a break.

Must have been a long driveway. :D

The fact is we have statements that confirm what the costs can be.

And note, you have absolutely solid to say.

Quote:
 

He is a no bullshit type character and assured me his cost of development is 30-50k all said and done.


Quote:
 
For what its worth my cousin completed a 17 lot subdivision about 8 years ago. (TAS) Level land but entirely unimproved required roading, kerbs, guttering, paths, underground power, sewerage and town water and these cost averaged $25k per lot. This would be considered a very straightforward subdivision i.e. encountered no real obstacles, good access flat land. He is an accountant and kept good and accurate records so I trust these figures albeit now somewat dated.


Quote:
 
Well including the land value the improved blocks owed about $48k each. He developed all the lots and sold them as house and land packages from $275k to about $340k. Good size blocks flat land quiet street cul de sac at end the blocks would have readily sold for $100k to $110k but certainly not much more so potentially about $50k profit per lot.


Oh yes, and there's my wild guesses.

Quote:
 
So something thats selling undeveloped lots for $100,000.....................it can be assumed that the real value of those lots $25,000 at best.
The next trick of our glorious banks will be to charge us a fee for using net bank!!!
You are no longer customer, you are property!!!

Don't be SAUCY with me Bernaisse
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Admin
Member Avatar
Administrator

Quote:
 
Peet profits fall 75% in 'challenging year' as residential lot sales decline

By Larry Schlesinger
Wednesday, 29 August 2012

Property developer and fund manager Peet has reported a 76% fall in net profits for the 2012 financial year in what it described as challenging market conditions, with Victoria the toughest market where it has projects under development.

Net profits for the year to June were $20.3 million, just ahead of earlier market guidance of $15 million to $20.2 million.

Earnings in Peet’s residential development operations declined 50% compared with the 2011 financial year to $20.2 million as lot settlements for the year declined to 395 from 598.

A further $40 million worth of contract are due to settle by December 2012.

Contracts on hand fell from 1,125 in 2011 to 788 in 2012 – worth $788 million – with Peet attributing this to “market weakness, substantially reduced capital investment in certain Victorian projects and difficulty of buyers obtaining finance”.

In particular it reported a slow-down in sales at its $293 million Aston residential development in Craigieburn, where more than 1,500 lots ares still available on Melbourne’s fringe. Its $131 million Ardan development in Greenvale featuring 558 lots has been deferred.

The developer expects market conditions to remain challenging in the 2013 financial year.

However, it says positive signs are emerging in WA and Queensland is also poised for recovery, with housing finance growth and building approvals improving.

Peet’s biggest residential project is Flagstone City, 45 minutes south-west of Brisbane in Jimboomba, which has a gross development value of $1.87 billion and is due to begin in 2013. It features 1,500 lots and is proceeding as scheduled.

In total Peet has a lot pipeline of 34,600 worth $6.2 billion.

Read more: http://www.propertyobserver.com.au/land/peet-profits-fall-75-in-challenging-year-as-residential-lot-sales-decline/2012082856277
Follow OzPropertyForum on Twitter | Like APF on Facebook | Circle APF on Google+
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Count du Monet
Member Avatar


Joseph
29 Aug 2012, 11:51 PM
Can i just say this thread is utter horse shit. I have seen fucking driveways cost more then 25k. Let alone land cost, development, compaction, planning, consultation, approvals, underground electrical, water, sewage, storm water, roads, kerbing, parks, etc. etc. etc. that goes into every land development. Sure it's probably not 200k per block, but it's defiantly not 25k. Give us a break.
compare and save! :lol :lol :lol

http://www.serviceseeking.com.au/news-and-ideas/pricing-guides/222-concreter-costs-compare-save
The next trick of our glorious banks will be to charge us a fee for using net bank!!!
You are no longer customer, you are property!!!

Don't be SAUCY with me Bernaisse
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Admin
Member Avatar
Administrator

Quote:
 
Bad tidings on the home front

PUBLISHED: 12 hours 39 MINUTES AGO
Zoë Fielding and Ben Hurley

Posted Image

Australia’s listed home builders, developers and materials companies have been battered by the deteriorating residential property market.

And many in the sector believe there are slim prospects for improvement in the coming year.

Home builders including AV Jennings, Stockland Property Group, Peet and Sunland Group, along with materials companies James Hardie, Adelaide Brighton and Boral, expressed pessimistic views about the outlook for the residential market in reporting their results this month.

Stockland’s outgoing managing director, Matthew Quinn, said conditions in the property market were the worst he had seen in 20 years. The company said its earnings in 2013 would probably be lower than in 2012.

The housing market had defied a predicted recovery and deteriorated in 2012, AV Jennings director Peter Summers said, as he reported a $29.8 million after-tax loss for the year.

Mr Summers blamed poor consumer confidence for constraining demand for new housing despite the local economy’s relative strength.

He welcomed a range of state government housing stimulus packages and said there were early signs of recovery in NSW and Queensland.

“While these signs are positive, it is still too early to ascertain whether this is a precursor to a more general upturn in activity in the sector, and therefore more likely that short-term trading conditions will remain challenging,” Mr Summers said.

Several developers have been forced to take impairments on their inventories. Australand Property Group, Mirvac Group and Stockland have written down their residential assets by a combined total of $1.4 billion since the peak of the market in 2008, according to CLSA analysts.

The analysts believe that the resignations of chief executives at Stockland, Mirvac, FKP Property Group and Aspen Group over the past month could lead to more inventory impairment charges being taken as new managers start with a clean slate.

Perth-based Peet suffered a 76 per cent drop in net profit for the year, including writedowns of $12.3 million on non-core land sales and $2.6 million on small development assets in Queensland. Peet managing director Brendan Gore said the group had managed its operations in line with expected lower sales volumes.

Housing Industry Association figures released on Tuesday show a steady decline in new home sales since 2011. In the 2012 financial year, pre-sales activity – a leading indicator of future residential revenue – for several of the listed developers has fallen.

In dollar terms (rather than lot numbers) Australand’s pre-sales for 2013 were down by 4 per cent, Mirvac’s were 43 per cent lower and Stockland’s were down 20 per cent, according to an analysis by CLSA.

The value of residential development work done also fell again in the June quarter to an 11-year low, Australian Bureau of Statistics figures released yesterday show.

Read more: http://www.afr.com/p/business/property/bad_tidings_on_the_home_front_UQaxDsGY8e11iX5WtmisnL
Follow OzPropertyForum on Twitter | Like APF on Facebook | Circle APF on Google+
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Trojan
Default APF Avatar


Costs of subdividing and development has been covered before.
Bulls say it costs alot and bears say it costs very little.

Once again I ask the bears if subdivision and development was so cheap, why don't they try it themselves?
If not for the profit then at least to help the poor Australians (that many profess to care so much about) to get a cheap home.
Edited by Trojan, 30 Aug 2012, 03:07 PM.
I put trolls and time wasters on my ignore list so if I don't respond to you, you are probably on it ....
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
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 6
  • 10



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