According to RPData, these are Sydney's Hotspots for 2009. Naturally, there's going to be diversity of opinion amongst experts but it's an eclectic choice, if you ask me 2009 Sydney hotspots - realestate.com.au
I don’t know how it works but Top Ryde is not on the list. West Ryde is nice place but it is a Top Ryde where new shopping centre is build. So can someone please explain how “experts” can be so blind?
I find it interesting that they call the hotspots, but they don't make mention of gains/growth or the degrees of those gains or growth or even make mention of those suburbs recent growth history...
I use historical growth rates as one indicator but not everyone does. There are those who believe that current suburb building activity (infrastructure changes, ratio of amenities, transport routes etc) rental yields and proximity to the CBD are sufficient enough reasons for labelling an area "hot".
I agree with your statement but at the same time I am trying to say that you can do better than “experts”. It is not difficult to separate facts from fiction.
Curious as to what you mean by the last sentence here, Dudek. The facts are that Granville, despite it's poorer reputation, still has one of the lowest medians for housing, is close to the Sydney CBD and has shown almost 8% average cg in house growth over the last decade. What's fictitious?
Jacque, The whole article fails in its basics. It is ether case of bad journalism or manipulative journalism. As mentioned in my previous post, there are better choices not on the list. What makes Granville better than Harris Park? If I was to look and crunch the numbers I think Merrylands has also very low median housing price. There is no silver bullet if it comes to choosing of the property. Some suburbs are good for rental yields some for capital gains. I personally prefer capital gains scenario. While with increasing rent yields you can maintain healthy cash flow one can argue that capital gains will trigger higher rents.
