Rich flocking to real estate

November 30, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Barclays survey shows people with more than $800,000 to invest are steering clear of stocks and bonds, and moving into real estate. Click here to see a story about the survey.

The wealthier the person, the more likely they are to prefer real estate, the British bank found. One reason is, they believe real estate, both residential and commercial, is a good investment given the depressed prices.

Aside from their home country, the respondents felt the United States held the greatest real estate opportunities.

What about the Indianapolis area? Would you rather have your money in local real estate or in stocks and bonds?

 

ADVERTISEMENT
  • I'll take bonds
    Indy real estate is likely to show a growth of less that 4% per year for the near future.
  • Lemmings.....
    And the "rich" are never wrong...
    TRUE - Real estate is considered more of a "tangible" investment because the investor can physically and visually assess the asset.
    FALSE - Real estate is a safer investment with more upside and less volatility than stocks/bonds.
    Despite what the NAR - National Association of Realtors (aka National Association of Racketeers) may suggest (without bias of course), real estate has not yet bottomed. If you disagree and see the Obama plan as inspiring economic growth & prosperity, then I am sure you will become a millionaire, assuming you are already a billionaire.
  • Recreation
    Stocks come and go (up and down), but a good piece of real estate cannot be recreated. Although it is a risk, keep in mind urban sprawl, urban renewal, and rural development. Just do not consider real estate a very liquid asset as it takes time to turn.
  • Pending
    All investments (housing, stocks, bonds, gold, etc) are all about timing. Reguardless if you are buying into one thing or another, it is an investment of sorts. For instance, If you decide to (right out of the gate), rent - you will get an easy pay in - no pay out (out side of instant living space). But if you buy a house, you will get a pay in - and pending on market and the investment along the way, pay out lower, higher, or even out from what your buy in market value.

    Granted, the house investments are much longer than your stocks/bonds investments, but all investments are risks, risks you will have to weigh yourself on. This is not a Democrat issue, not a Republican issue, but an issue of how YOU are investing YOUR money in whatever market you invest in. Just gotta act responsibly and wise when investing in the given market.

    Since I am new in the market, I am looking more towards a home than stocks or bonds right now. I can get more use out of a home. Granted, I will have alot more investment in my end, but I will have more (not complete, but) control of the investment output because of that.

    Tell me, Joe Schmoe, Do you own stocks/bonds or even a home? If so, when did you put yourself into that(those) investment(s)? Was it during the worst time in the market (at a high point)? I will agree that we haven't seen the bottom of the housing market yet, but no matter what, we will always need a place to live.
  • I'll take risk
    Predicting the bottom is worthless. RE Traders don't make $ by predicting the bottom, they make it by purchasing on a swing. Aiming for the bottom is obvious but buying just before the turnaround or on the way up is the goal. Same with selling, sell near the top, don't guess when you're there-otherwise, you could be the idiot with a bunch of property in the next downturn with nobody to occupy/buy it (see Duke). If that's too risky, I'll sell you a bond and give you back a bond + 1% in 5 years.
  • Land
    "Stocks may rise and fall, utilities and transportation systems may collapse, people are no damned good... but they will always need land, and they'll pay through the nose to get it."
    â??Lex Luthor

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. I still don't understand how the FBI had any right whatsoever to investigate this elderly collector. Before the Antiquities Act it was completely legal to buy, trade or collect Native American artifacts. I used to see arrow heads, axes, bowls, corn grinders at antique shops and flea markets for sale and I bought them myself. But that was in the late 60's and early 70's. And I now know that people used to steal items from sites and sell them. I understand that is illegal. But we used to find arrow heads and even a corn grinder in our back yard when I was a child. And I still have those items today in my small collection.

  2. I lived in California and they had many of the things noted in the proposed suggestions from the "Blue Ribbon Panel". California is near financial collapse now. Let's not turn the great state of Indiana into a third world dump like California.

  3. The temporary closure of BR Avenue will get a lot of attention. But, one thing reported by the IndyStar really stands out to me, and is extraordinarily depressing: “Police also have agreed to crack down on noise violations, traffic violations and public intoxication.” In other words, the police have generously agreed to do their jobs (temporarily, at least), instead of just standing around waiting for someone to call 911. When is someone in this department going to get off their fat arse (looking at you, Chief), get their minds out of 1975-era policing and into 2014, and have his department engage in pro-active work instead of sitting around waiting for someone to be shot? Why in the hell does it take 7 people getting shot in one night in one of the city’s biggest tourist destinations, to convince the police (reluctantly, it would appear) that they actually need to do their f’n jobs? When is the Chief going to realize that there’s a huge, direct, proven correlation between enforcing the law (yes, all laws, especially those affecting quality of life) and preventing larger crimes from occurring? Is it racial BS? Is that what this extraordinary reluctance is all about? Is the department and the city terrified that if they do their jobs, they might offend someone? Whom, exactly? Will the victims of violence, murder, assault, rape, robbery, and theft be offended? Will the citizens who have to tolerate their deteriorating quality of life be offended? Will the businesses who see their customers flee be offended? Or, is it simple ignorance (maybe the Chief hasn’t heard about NYC’s success in fighting crime - it’s only the biggest g*&#am city in the country, after all)? Either way, Chief, if you don’t want to do your job, then step down. Let someone who actually wants the job take it.

  4. I thought Indiana had all the funding it needed for everything. That's why the state lottery and casino gambling were allowed, as the new tax revenue would take care of everything the state wanted to do.The recommendations sound like they came from California. Better think about that. What is the financial condition of that state?

  5. I was a fan of WIBC in the morning, Steve was the only WIBC host that I listened too, he gave the news with so much flare that I enjoyed listening to him on my way to work. Katz is no Steve. Sadly, I will not be listening to WIBC anymore.

ADVERTISEMENT