I'm not so sure, or sounds like some of those unregulated schemes that people post about on here from time to time.
Askaboutmoney has an anti-property investment bent
- Thread starter Bronte
- Start date
You are correct there, it is of similar ilk to the unregulated schemes we see on here. But the 'advantage' with them is that you just lose all your money. They are not a never ending liability which a PRS investment could turn out to be.
Rents will fall one way or another. They are unnaturally high at the moment. An ordinary apartment in Cork City shouldn't be yielding 10% or more. And that is the only attraction of the PRS, the high rents.
When rents fall, all the restrictions, the eviction bans, the RTB supported dodgy tenants, the criminal liabilities, the increasing standards, the increasing costs will all remain. You'll have all the downsides and no upsides.
Horses die. Houses don’t. Shares tank, you get nothing, property collapses you still have it.
What is this new horror?
New Residential Tenancies Bill
My sibling is getting non stop inspections, the latest item they 'found' needs doing is a lock on the bathroom door, This is incredible stuff. Millions is being spent on this and these are the types of issues being picked up. My properties failed due to weedy gardens and cracked tiles, stuff...
www.askaboutmoney.com
Covered in thread above, but gist of it is below:
Accommodation providers vilified once again. Longer prison sentences, a tripled window to prosecute them, and a raft of new fines. And not a word in any media outlet. Very much a sign of the times, and perhaps a telling illustration of why the housing crisis exists in the first place.
Very rarely for companies with a reasonable/sound business model and decent management.
I can't remember the last listed company that went to zero. Probably Anglo. But the only people burned there were those who didn't diversify and went all in on Irish bank shares (a surprisingly large minority).
Not sure what you'd want with the pile of rubble left after it collapses.
My aunt lost everything on BofI.
Why did she invest in one share/company?
That's not quite putting money on a horse but it's coming close.
Last edited:
Trusted the bank advisors!
Sounds like she was badly informed and maybe badly advised. This doesn't really prove the case that investing in shares is like gambling on a horse though or reinforce the case for investing in property over other options.
Seems unusual that they would recommend an investment in their own share capital. It must've been at a point in time when they owner the stockbroker involved and got their commission that way.
Last edited:
All holders of shares in Anglo were burned/lost equally.
See, I am unable to think of a listed company that was a total loss.
Sorry, I misread your reply.
Two people invest €100k. One goes all on on Anglo. The other invests equal amounts on 20 different companies, well diversified by sector and geographically, including Anglo. The second person does not suffer the the same monetary loss as the first who went all in on Anglo.
@Fortune
That's not the same though. In your example both lost 100% of their initial investment in Anglo. Of course if someone owns more shares, they loose more money. The point you made (as I interpret it) was that diversification meant you were not burned. Mine is that every holder of the shares were burned (as in lost their full investment). This is probably off topic.
That's not the same though. In your example both lost 100% of their initial investment in Anglo. Of course if someone owns more shares, they loose more money. The point you made (as I interpret it) was that diversification meant you were not burned. Mine is that every holder of the shares were burned (as in lost their full investment). This is probably off topic.
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 58,406
This makes no sense.
Most people don't invest in just one share. They invest in a portfolio. Some elements of that portfolio may well fall to zero and others may increase by 100% compensating for the loss in one.
By all means advocate for property investment ahead of equity investment, but do so on the basis of rational argument.
Many property investors lost their entire investment during the last crash because they put down a 10% deposit and property prices fell by more than 10% and the bank appointed a Receiver to the property.
I have invested in both equities and property over the last 3 decades.
Now that im ready to retire, I will remain in equities but cash in my property investment.
A decade ago I would have have decided to keep the property investment upon retirement, but not now.
Now that im ready to retire, I will remain in equities but cash in my property investment.
A decade ago I would have have decided to keep the property investment upon retirement, but not now.
How would you calculate yield if you already own the property and you've now very high rent because you've put money into it to attract the high rent. Would you do it based on the money you've currently spent or not?