<html><body>
The main reason superannuation costs are too high in Australia is both simple and horrendously complex: it’s the only service we buy where we give the service provider our money to look after.
It’s true that we also give our money to banks, but mostly, especially when we’re young, the banks give us money as loans.
The fact that super funds, and the investment managers and wealth advisers who run them, hold our money for us allows them to simply take some of it every month as their fee.
Everyone else has to send us a bill.
This might sound too obvious to even bother mentioning, but that system has two very powerful hidden effects:
<ol>
<li>
The providers of investment services get to charge a percentage of the money, and almost nobody understands percentages and even fewer understand the power of compounding;
</li>
<li>
Since the fee is usually a fixed percentage of the client’s account balance, it increases at the same rate as the balance, which is in turn being fed by the sum of investment returns and all contributions – mandatory and voluntary.
</li>
</ol>
<img src="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/46256/width668/wbzddg8b-1397351382.jpg" alt="">
Compounding fees
As a result, super and investment fees compound at several times the rate of inflation but the customers barely see what’s happening, and those that do, don’t understand it.
Say you’re 25, earning $50,000 and you start with $1000 balance in super. And say the fee is 1% (actually by the time you add in advice and investment management it’s probably more like 2%, but let’s stick with 1% for simplicity).
That 1% produces a $10 fee. In the following 12 months you contribute 9% of your salary, or $375 per month. On top of that the fund manages a return of 10% on the average balance.
At the end of the year your balance will be $5950 – marvellous. New fee: $59.50 – a six-fold increase.
Next year you got a pay rise of 5%, which means your contributions increase to $393.75 per month, or $4725. Once again the fund earns you 10%, so at the end of the year your new balance is $11,506. New fee: $115.06 – nearly twice last year’s fee.
Obviously that escalation in fees is dramatic because the balance started from a low base. That means, by the way, that people with low balances who are just starting out are subsidised by those with more money in their accounts, and that’s the best thing about the percentage fee system.
So let’s look at the same metrics for someone more established in the workforce, with $100,000 in super and a salary of $100,000 a year.
First year fee is $1,000 (1% of $100,000). Next year, assuming 9% of salary in contributions and a 10% return on the average balance, the fee is $1,194.50 – an increase of 19.45%.
Next year’s fee, assuming a 5% salary increase and another 10% investment return, is $1336.25, 12% more than last year. And the year after you get a promotion! Salary goes to $120,000 and contributions to $10,800 for the year. Your new super balance is a very healthy $158,270. New fee: $1582.70 – an 18% increase over last year.
<h2>And yet we comply…</h2>
Do you ring and complain about being gouged? Well, no, because the fee is still 1% – it hasn’t changed. And you’re feeling good about the rising balance, so why complain? And anyway, you probably don’t even know. The fee statement is there somewhere, but you never pay much attention to it.
There are two things to think about here. First, your salary is increasing by 5% so it’s a fair bet that the super fund’s staff are also getting the same sort of pay rises, possibly less.
Yet the fees are increasing at 2-3 times that rate because the law requires us to contribute 9% of salary and because investment returns usually average about three times the inflation rate as well, simply as a result of the rising stockmarket (not the super fund’s brilliance). That’s the whole point of investing in shares – they return 2-3 times inflation over time.
Second, with $150,000 in super you’re probably paying 2% in management and adviser fees (not 1%), which is $3000 a year, or $250 a month. Some people have account balances of $500,000, especially when they retire, and pay fees of $10,000 a year, or $833 a month.
Think about how many services you pay $800 a month for, month after month, year after year, or even $250 a month for that matter.
<h2>What can be done?</h2>
Super funds hate this description, but superannuation is a utility, like gas, electricity or the phone; in fact it’s more so - a government-mandated utility.
What’s more you don’t get much for the money – basically super funds put the money into large companies and ride the market up and down. This year’s winner is next year’s loser, and vice versa, and there’s no way of telling the difference between them.
Yet not only is it almost certainly the most expensive service you buy, the cost of it compounds at several times the inflation rate every year and the providers don’t have to send you a bill like the other utilities – they just quietly take some of your money each month.
And remember that the prices charged by gas, electricity and communications companies are regulated by the ACCC, which actually determines what return on capital they’re allowed to make. Super fees are not regulated at all.
So to control the ballooning cost of super, three things should happen:
<ul>
<li>
super funds and their advisers must be told to stop skimming the accounts for their fees, and to send a bill instead that we have to actually pay
</li>
<li>
the costs of compliance and regulation need to be brought down, which the government is trying to do
</li>
<li>
the fees that super funds charge, and the profits they make, should be regulated, just as other utilities are regulated.
</li>
</ul>
On second thoughts, perhaps only the first of those would be needed.
If we started getting a bill for $500 a month from our super fund, the price would quickly come down because customers wouldn’t pay it … especially when the share market was falling and along with it all the account balances.
Yes, stop making the super funds disclose the fees they skim, make them send us a bill instead.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/25199/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
Alan Kohler is the founder of the Eureka Report, a subscription-based newsletter that gives general advice related to superannuation.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/superannuation-is-too-costly-so-bill-me-25199">original article</a>.
</body></html>

akohler-TyLfJGrMb8

Superannuation is too costly, so bill me

<html><body>
The Reserve Bank has no choice but to join the currency debasement contest that’s now going on around the world, and to cut rates by another 1 percentage point in the coming 12 months – including 0.5 percentage points by the end of the year.
The Australian dollar is in a 'no lose' situation: when Western central banks launch asset buying programs, as the central banks of the US, Europe, UK and Japan have all done lately, the 'risk on' environment sees the Aussie rise as a result of fund buying; but Australia’s AAA status and relatively high yield makes it a preferred safe haven as well, especially for other central banks.
Last week the RBA published a list of 16 global central banks that have been buying Australian dollars as part of their diversification strategy, including Russia, Brazil, Korea and Switzerland. On Thursday the Philippines was added to the list.
The result is that as the Chinese economy slows, commodity prices fall and with them Australia’s terms of trade, while the exchange rate has remained stubbornly above 104 US cents.
In other words, the dollar’s unique status as risk asset for hedge funds and safe haven for central banks means that it is no longer doing its usual job of buffering the Australian economy from an Asian or global downturn, as it did in 2001 and 2008.
This morning it is trading at 104.5 US cents, having slipped from its post-third-quarter high of 106.26.
What to do? Well, in March, when the dollar touched 108, the RBA started to sell more dollars than usual and talked the currency down.
Then on May 1, with the dollar still above 104, it shocked the market with a bigger than expected cut of 50 basis points and followed up with another 25 points in June. The dollar instantly fell to 103.3 on May 1 and then kept falling, bottoming at just below 97 US cents a month later before climbing to 106 in August on the back of speculation about European and US quantitative easing programs.
Since then the risk-on trade, the interest differential and central bank diversification has kept it above 104.
 
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
 
The RBA must cut again in October, and possibly by another 50 basis points to shock the markets once more. It also needs to do a bit more Australian dollar selling than usual, although not enough to trigger suggestions that it’s 'intervening' in the currency (can’t have that!).
Certainly the cash rate needs to be significantly lower than it is now by this time next year.
In essence it seems that the world’s central banks are working hard to debase their currencies as an alternative to a trade war. That may not be the primary intention of their quantitative easing and zero interest rate strategies, but it’s definitely an intended consequence.
The US, Europe, UK and Japan are all desperately keen to prop up, and if possible grow, net exports because of weak domestic employment. Some central banks are intervening directly in their currencies, others are settling for printing money to reduce its value.
For years now, the RBA has been talking about the inevitable “painful structural adjustment” as a result of the high terms of trade and currency.
But what if the terms of trade go back down and the currency doesn’t?
The fact that hedge funds and other central banks like the Aussie anyway should not be allowed to continue the painful structural adjustment for Australia’s export industries even as their export prices and volumes fall as well.
The result would not be structural adjustment, but disaster.
This article originally appeared on <a href="https://www.businessspectator.com.au/" target="_blank">Business Spectator.</a>
</body></html>

The RBA must cut the cash rate by 100 basis points by next year

<html><body>
Today's Business Spectator CEO Pulse survey puts the matter beyond doubt: Australia's chief executives do not like the Fair Work Act one bit.
They think it's bad for their businesses, they think it's bad for their industries and they especially think it's bad for the country. What's more, two-thirds of them think Fair Work Australia is doing a worse job than its predecessor, the Fair Pay Commission, because it's bureaucratic, inefficient and, worst of all, biased.
Do the nation's business leaders think the Rudd/Gillard system of workplace relations has anything going for it at all? Well, er, 3% of them think it has made things better.
The latest quarterly survey of Australian CEOs carried out by GA Research*, contains a devastating critique of the Fair Work Act and a rebuttal of the government's argument that the legislation improves productivity and is supported by business. It doesn't, and it's not.
The main problem, nominated by 54% of respondents, is that the Act sets up tension between wages and productivity. Other issues that need to be resolved are provisions around industrial action, collective bargaining and unfair dismissal – basically all the important things.
A lot of CEOs said that the new regime sets up an adversarial relationship between the unions and business, and is based around conflict. Some said that costs had increased and that they were dealing with more disputes and others said that the losses to productivity were hampering their ability to compete internationally.
To be fair, there were some positive comments. One CEO told our surveyors that there was "greater clarity and simplification via modern awards", while another praised Fair Work Australia: "Overall, Fair Work has presided over a necessarily complex area competently."
But Australia's CEOs have given the system a resounding thumbs down, with 82% saying it's bad for Australia, 60% concluding it's bad for their industry, and 51% that it's bad for their own company.
The interesting difference between those three figures lies in varying numbers of CEOs who think it has no impact at all: from 45% for the individual businesses to 9% for the nation. There was no change in the percentage that thought it was good, which was 3% for all categories.
Unsurprisingly, perhaps, the CEO collective now gives the Labor government 2.8 out of 10 for managing the economy. When we started these surveys in February 2010 the score was 5.4 out of 10, almost double today's score.
The decline in the government's standing has been remarkably steady, apart from a few months after Julia Gillard took over as prime minister and again just after the Future Jobs Forum was held late last year, accompanied as it was by a brief flurry of optimism that there would some action to help businesses lift employment.
Another interesting trend in the survey is around what's keeping them awake at night: achieving top line growth has now clearly replaced "sourcing and retaining skilled staff" as the key issue for CEOs. Even though unemployment is still low, CEOs are now much more worried about growing sales than finding staff.
Broadly, optimism about both the economy as a whole and individual businesses has fallen a long way versus this time last year: from 72% feeling somewhat or strongly optimistic about their own business to 56% now.
As for optimism about the Australian economy as a whole, that's down from 51% a year ago to 28% now, and no one is "strongly optimistic" at all – the whole 28% is now just "somewhat optimistic".
This is not good. CEOs are, by their nature, optimistic creatures because they spend their lives selling hope to their staff and their customers. That nearly a half of them are pessimistic about the nation's prospects, and a fifth of them are gloomy about their own companies is kind of shocking.
* Research design and analysis for the CEO Pulse was conducted by GA Research and fieldwork by AFS. The sample comprised n=96 CEOs of organisations with an Australian turnover of $100 million or more who opted to participate in a five minute survey conducted over the phone or online between July 17 and July 29, 2012.
This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.businessspectator.com.au/" rel="nofollow">Business Spectator</a>.
</body></html>

Fair Work anger at the heart of CEO pessimism: Kohler

<html><body>
The next wave of online retailing, far more dangerous for traditional store retailers than the first wave, is now upon us. It has been happening in the US and Europe for more than a year, but has now arrived in Australia.
It is – wait for it – full-price, non-discount retailing. That’s right – they don’t compete on price. The first wave of online retailers was, and still is, the discounters, but why are full-price online stores more of a wealth hazard for traditional bricks and mortar retailers? Because the margin is applied to service, specifically better delivery, instead of discounting.
The first of these is an online clothing and footwear store called The Iconic, which started up six months ago. It was created in just six months of business planning by five former management consultants, four from Boston Consulting and one from McKinsey and Co, copying similar operations in Europe.
The Iconic’s point of difference is that it offers free overnight delivery, guaranteed, within Australia, and three-hour delivery in Sydney for $4.95. Returns within 100 days have free delivery as well.
The business’s principals are two Australians, Adam Jacobs and Cameron Votan, two Germans, Finn Henzel and Andreas Otto and an American, Ryan Tuohy. They were all working in Sydney with BCG and McKinsey and decided a year ago that there was a gap in this country for a full-priced, free delivery retailer, copying ones in the US and Europe that had already taken off.
They got start-up funding from Rocket Internet, one of the world’s biggest incubator funds, as well as a private Swedish fund called Kinnevik.
Almost all innovation involves taking something that’s already being done and doing it better, and the key to making this one work was developing a partnership with Australia Post. Under Ahmed Fahour’s management Australia Post is trying to transform itself into a parcel delivery service for products bought online, to counter the collapse of ordinary mail.
The five partners persuaded Fahour and his team to initiate a sorting shift between 2am and 4am that didn't cost The Iconic or its customers any more. It means that products bought in the evening in front of the TV are ready to be dispatched by 6am the next morning and delivered free at 9am (according to Adam Jacobs).
The three-hour delivery within Sydney is done by a courier company and an automatic dispatch system; any longer and the fee is refunded.
This is an astonishing level of service, and takes online retailing to the next level.
The five partners won’t reveal any of their numbers except website traffic, which is public anyway. The Iconic is averaging 150,000 unique visitors a day, which is about three times the traffic that most of the traditional retailers are getting to their online stores.
Henzel told me they are “considerably” ahead of business plan at this stage and growing rapidly, mainly supported by performance marketing online, but also some TV, radio and print marketing.
In my view this sort of operation is a dire threat to existing store retailers, especially the big cumbersome ones.
At this stage it sells about 500 fashion brands – mostly Australian, but they are steadily signing up international brands as well. The reason it’s taking longer for the overseas brands is that they have to deal with local distributors, who have close existing relationships with stores like David Jones and Myer and are reluctant to deal with a challenger.
But it’s more of a threat to the property owners. Myer, David Jones and the other fashion chains all now have online stores and although they have been slow to move, they can catch up if they’re good enough.
But the landlords have no hope. Like print media, they are in a business with a limited future – the only question is how long they’ve got.
This article originally appeared on <a href="https://www.businessspectator.com.au/" target="_blank">Business Spectator.</a>
</body></html>

New wave of online retailers pose more of a threat to Aussie bricks and mortar stores: Kohler

<html><body>
And everyone thought this was going to be a tough budget. It was a piece of cake, really – Wayne Swan hardly had to employ any smoke and mirrors at all. Just do a bit of pea-and-thimble shuffling of spending out of 2012-13, and revenue in, both forwards and backwards, forecast a bumper 11% increase in tax revenue, and – hey presto! – watch me pull a surplus out of my hat.
That’s right, tax receipts are going to grow by 11% in 2012-13, according to this budget, including company tax up 9% and personal tax up by 8%. On top of that, there’s an extra $5.6 billion from resource rent taxes and $4 billion from the carbon tax. 
This is, at its core, a big-taxing, big-spending budget, including a big increase in welfare. It is the budget of an unpopular government approaching an election, not one that’s tightening the belt.
According to Budget Paper No.2 – Budget Measures, “expense measures” in this budget actually increasespending by $201.2 million.
There are a total of 284 separate increases in spending in the budget, ranging in size from $100,000 (a new Remote Jobs and Communities Programme) to $911 million (continuing “Operation Slipper” in Afghanistan).
On top of that, about $1.6 billion in spending was pulled forward from 2012-13 into 2011-12: $1.1 billion has been thrown at local councils this year in grants that were due to be paid in 2012-13, and another $500 million has been pulled forward by replacing the Education Tax Refund with a “Schoolkids bonus”.
In total, welfare payments, including the school kids bonus and the extra family welfare, go up by $4.8 billion.
Meanwhile the revenue measures in this budget add up to $1.7 billion in extra revenue, but they’re mostly just deferrals of tax cuts and special dividends.
The higher cap for super contributions has been deferred ($580 million more money in 2012-13), the company tax cut has been scrapped ($302 million), another $121 million will be pulled out of super by implementing the so-called “SuperStream” reforms, and $200 million will be yanked out of the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation as a special dividend and a $100 million one-off dividend from the Australian Reinsurance Pool Corporation. Oh, and there’s $127 million from cigarettes and tobacco excise.
Tax receipts usually grow by about 8% a year, thanks to fiscal drag (taxpayers moving into higher marginal brackets), but this year’s increase is a blockbuster 11%. Yes, it’s about $6 billion less than forecast six months ago but that was just a silly forecast.
Is the new one silly as well? Probably, but we won’t really know for 18 months.
Iron ore and coal companies aren’t expecting to pay any MRRT, so the $3.5 billion budgeted from that in 2012-13 looks dodgy, and the rest of the increase depends on economic growth of 3.25% and on the companies that are due to pay the carbon tax continuing to spew out greenhouse gases at the same rate, rather than doing something about it to avoid tax.
The important thing is that, thanks to the budgeted $33.4 billion increase in tax revenue, the government doesn’t have to cut spending and can actually increase it. I know they will tell you that spending is, indeed, being cut, but don’t believe it.
One of the curious things in this budget is that it assumes a cut in staff numbers for the Commonwealth public service of 3,073 to 258,563, or 1.2% – not much, but better than the big increases of previous years. A third of the cut is in the Australian Taxation Office, which is supposed to be losing 1,039 staff, and half the rest is just casual census collectors moving off the books.
Yet the budget also says $378 million is going to be provided to the ATO over four years so it can increase its collection of tax debts, increase its GST collections, and fight tax evasion.
That investment is budgeted to provide a return of $2.4 billion over the forward estimates – six times the investment – but you would think it won’t result in a staff cut of more than 1,000 people in the ATO, if they are supposed to run down that much more tax.
This article originally appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessspectator.com.au/">Business Spectator.</a>
</body></html>

Federal budget 2012: A big taxing, big spending budget: Alan Kohler

<html><body>
The Reserve Bank's economics department had a bad year in 2011, and as a result the board is now high and dry with an official cash rate that is obviously wrong. It needs to come down by 0.5%, to 3.75%. 
In its February 2011 Statement on Monetary Policy, the RBA had a GDP growth forecast for the year ended December 2011 of 4.25% and for June 2012 of 3.75%. CPI inflation for June 2012 was forecast at 2.75%, the same as underlying inflation.
But then in May the bank's economists came over all bullish and upped their GDP forecast for June 2012 to 4.25%, while leaving the December forecast at 4.25%. CPI inflation for June was cut to 2.5%. In August the GDP forecast was up again to 4.5% and while the CPI forecast was left at 2.5%, the underlying inflation forecast was jacked up to 3%.
In November wobbles started to appear and the GDP forecast was cut to 4% and underlying inflation back to 2.5%. In February this year the GDP forecast for June 2012 was back to 3.5% but underlying inflation was actually raised to 2.75%.
So the RBA's economists have made two big mistakes: they got 2011 GDP growth horribly wrong and raised their inflation forecast in February for this financial year even as GDP was falling short.
It's hard to know what came over them on GDP in May last year, but the statement was especially bullish about commodity prices and resource and farm exports. Maybe they were influenced by Treasury, which had a GDP forecast for 2011-12 of 4% in the May budget last year, which has also turned out to be wildly wrong, leading to a bigger than expected deficit (by almost $10 billion).
But why the RBA felt the need to be more bullish about economic growth than Treasury in the middle of last year will probably have to remain a mystery, but that rush of blood to the head in May is still dogging the Reserve bank governor, Glenn Stevens and his board.
With GDP growth of 3.5% and underlying inflation of 2.75% in their February SMP forecasts for 2012, the board could hardly cut rates then, no matter how hard the business people on the board were arguing for it.
The minutes for the April meeting drily say: "Members noted that the national accounts for the December quarter had shown an increase in real GDP of 0.4% in the quarter and 2.3% over the year, which were both lower than expected."
Well, yes, that's an understatement – as recently as November the economists were forecasting 2.75% growth for 2011; just six months earlier they'd been forecasting 4.25%! That's almost twice reality.
One can imagine a fierce debate in the April meeting between the business people and the economists, with the latter clinging to the last shreds of their dignity. In the event they persuaded the board to wait for the March quarter inflation figure before cutting rates and hanging them out to dry.
Kerplunk! March quarter CPI inflation was 1.6%, against last November's forecast for the year to June of 3.25% (there wasn't a forecast for the March quarter). By February that had been slashed to 1.75%, but even that now looks too high.
Next Tuesday it will be, or should be at least, a bedraggled, hangdog group of economists who shuffle into the RBA board meeting for their presentation. And many of the board members may well be checking their emails while it's going on, having already made up their minds to cut rates by 50 basis points.
Which is what they should do.
This article originally appeared on <a href="https://www.businessspectator.com.au/" target="_blank">Business Spectator.</a>
 
 
</body></html>

The RBA has egg on its face and needs to cut rates by 50 basis points: Alan Kohler

<html><body>
There’s an air of growing panic among Australia’s business people. Company directors are calling for a budget deficit, retailers feel like they are peering over a cliff and everybody’s worried sick about the carbon tax and the high currency.
Metcash’s Andrew Reitzer reported yesterday that he is seeing “unprecedented and prolonged challenging operating conditions”. The IGA supermarkets are battling deflation of 0.9%, with specials making up more than half of all shopping baskets and as a result Metcash is laying off 478 people.
Meanwhile the Reserve Bank and Treasury are insouciant. RBA Governor Glenn Stevens merely said yesterday that “considerable structural change is occurring”, while putting off a rate cut. Treasury is working with the government to produce one of the toughest budgets in the nation’s history.
I can’t remember a time when the policymakers and the real world diverged as much as they do now.
It’s entirely possible that business people are in a funk unnecessarily and that the bureaucrats in Canberra and Martin Place have a better idea of what’s going on, but I doubt it. The truth is that both the RBA and Treasury have been getting it wrong, and both are being forced to adjust their economic forecasts downwards.
At yesterday’s RBA meeting, according to Governor Glenn Stevens: “the board judged the pace of output growth to be somewhat lower than earlier estimated”, but they stubbornly put off a rate cut anyway.
Last year’s federal budget forecast real GDP growth this financial year of 4%, which now looks absurdly optimistic. For calendar 2011, growth was half that figure and there is no reason to think it will be much different for the financial year – perhaps a little more than 2%.
So why do the government economists have their heads in the clouds, apart from the fact that it’s normal?
It’s partly because one person’s 'structural change' is another’s nightmare, and partly because it suits them: Treasury needs to produce a $40 billion fiscal turnaround to assist the treasurer’s political agenda and the RBA is still focused on inflation.
Business people, meanwhile, are seeing weak domestic demand because of consumer deleveraging, weak export demand because of the currency appreciation, and rising costs because of the labour laws and higher energy prices, both present and future.
To a large extent, the yawning gap between the economists and business people reflects the difference between 'gross' and 'marginal' – that is, the RBA is watching aggregate national inflation numbers while business people are watching their margins get hammered, and Treasury is watching national output, including the mining investment boom, while on the east coast, businesses are watching their all-important marginal sales collapse.
Business is a marginal game, while economics is gross.
This article originally appeared on <a href="https://www.businessspectator.com.au/" target="_blank">Business Spectator</a>
 
 
</body></html>

Business is marginal, government economists have their heads in the clouds: Alan Kohler

<html><body>
Keynesian purists are all clutching their foreheads, but actually it's pretty fabulous that Australia's politicians are competing with each other to promise budget surpluses: it's so much better than the appalling tax cut and spending competition of last decade led by JW Howard. 
Politicians can really only be trusted with emergency fiscal policy, such as when they flooded the world, and Australia, with blind government spending in late 2008. Otherwise borrow only in recession please, and at other times make outgoings less than incomings.
Central banks are running the global economy now, not finance ministers and bureaucrats. Elected governments are either tapped out or, in the case of Australia, splendidly sidelined by the potent political symbolism of surplus budgeting.
The European Central Bank and the US Federal Reserve are both using the rather novel strategy of printing money for financial speculators to play with to try and avoid another collapse and recession. Quantitative easing in the US and the ECB's LTRO strategy involve flooding the system with cheap money knowing that it won't be lent but gambled on carry trades and asset punts.
The result, as we begin 2012, is rising asset markets. In the US it's shares and property, in Europe all-important sovereign bonds, specifically in Italy and Spain. This morning's contraction in German industrial production, however, as well as the continuing weakness in US employment (highlighted by Fed chairman <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-07/bernanke-says-8-3-unemployment-understates-weakness-in-u-s-labor-market" target="_blank">Ben Bernanke this morning</a>) suggests that the transmission of this plan to the real economy is muffled.
The problem for the Australian central bank is that the speculators thus financed are keen on Australian assets, and why not? It's a AAA country paying 4% on 10-year bonds and a dividend yield of 8% on Telstra shares that is underpinned by government cash.
Australia is a carry trade paradise and to prove it the dollar is at, or close to, $US1.08, moving higher.
So does the RBA cut rates to bring down the currency, as some suggest? No, that won't work. The capital inflow is not investing in cash.
Far better, according to the RBA, to just watch the inflation rate, watch unemployment, try to ignore warnings about hardship and layoffs in the real world, and read up with what's happening in Europe.
On that basis there was a solid case for leaving rates on hold yesterday because, in theory and looking only at the stats, the economy is in equilibrium (moderate inflation, moderate to low unemployment) and Europe is looking a bit better thanks to the ECB's employment of the "good bacteria" of carry trade speculators keep the sovereign bond market afloat.
But as we have suggested previously in these columns, unemployment on the Australian east coast, and perhaps in the national statistics, is heading higher because retailers, manufacturers and banks are all cutting costs, because penalty rates are capping employment in hospitality and the currency is cutting tourism and exports.
In addition there seems a fair chance the banks will break cover and raise mortgage rates over the next month, starting with ANZ on Friday, which won't be great for the property market.
But at least Australia's RBA still has "sea-room", to quote Wayne Swan, to use normal monetary policy to impose a pay cut on the nation's bank depositors, thus lowering at least some of the banks' funding costs.
Other central banks can't do that since rates are at or close to zero. All they can do is print money for speculators to play with and hope that one day actual businesses will want to start borrowing to invest.
This article originally appeared on<a href="https://www.businessspectator.com.au/" target="_blank"> Business Spectator</a>.
 
</body></html>

There's a fair chance the banks will raise mortgage rates, starting with ANZ on Friday: Kohler

<html><body>
It’s hard to avoid concluding that both employment and commercial property returns in Australia are going to come under a lot of pressure this year and beyond. The banks are clearly preparing for some big redundancy rounds because of slower lending growth and higher funding costs, and retailers have been closing down and reducing staff for a while already and are going to keep doing it. Meanwhile, the manufacturing industry is hanging on by its fingernails, through government funding of the car industry. These industries are Australia’s three biggest employers, and each is now in a downturn for both the same and different reasons. They are going to need fewer workers and less real estate – offices, shops and factories. This week a big report on the banks by Jonathan Mott of UBS got a lot of attention when he predicted that 7,000 jobs would go in the banking industry. He said the banks’ staff numbers have increased from 141,000 to 179,000 over the past 10 years, and would be cut to 172,000 over two years. And the rest. As Stephen Bartholomeusz pointed out in Business Spectator yesterday (<a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/ANZ-McFarlane-job-cuts-banks-CBA-NAB-WBC-pd20120117-QL3MP?OpenDocument&amp;src=sph">Brace for a bank jobs blitz</a>, January 17), banks will have to reshape their business models, if not reinvent them, because credit growth has fallen permanently, the cost of funds has increased and online banking is now fully established. As with retailing and manufacturing – all businesses in fact – the first of those is the most important. Banks have already disconnected themselves from the Reserve Bank’s interest rate moves and will be cutting their mortgage rates by less than official cash rates this year. In fact, they might even increase rates while the RBA cuts. Cost increases can generally be passed on to customers, but if demand for your product is down there is nothing you can do but reduce costs, and for banks, retailers and manufacturers, that means staff. Jonathan Mott says the banks have been “lax” on costs, increasing staff by 7% a year for a decade, compared with 2.7% a year the previous decade. They were “investing for growth”. That growth – 14% to 16% compound annual growth in lending – has now evaporated and the banks have entered a new era of low volume growth as their customers retrench debt. The only sector that is investing and borrowing large sums in Australia is mining and energy, and the local banks haven’t got much of a foothold there – the big projects are funded globally. And mortgage rate cuts only tend to accelerate the reduction in lending growth because 80 per cent of mortgagees don’t reduce their repayments: they just increase their principal repayments and keep the monthly mortgage payments the same. That offsets any growth in new lending, which is pretty weak these days anyway. And the fact is that almost everybody is using ATMs and internet banking these days. Branches and face-to-face contact with customers are still important for sales and client relationships – especially big clients – but nobody’s going into branches to get cash, transfer money or pay bills any more. A revolution has happened in banking that is not yet reflected in the way they operate. I suspect the reduction in banking employment will be a lot more than 7,000 over the next few years. Likewise retailing. I drove down the clothing precinct of Bridge Road, Richmond yesterday and in a few hundred metres counted six closing down sales and three empty stores. While the big malls are still reporting near-100 per cent occupancy, most strip shopping centres are being hollowed out by online shopping combined with weak consumer spending. The retail revolution has only just begun but it’s happening with a rush now, helped by the strong Australian dollar. With customers doing a big part of their shopping online, a lot less shop staff will be needed to help them decide what to buy. As for manufacturing, the Australian dollar is not coming down in a hurry so exporting and competing with imports will remain difficult, if not impossible. The car industry patient is being kept alive by government life support, but at some point, you’d think, the respirator will have to be turned off, or at least down. Even with the subsidies, parts of the industry will die. Empty offices, empty shops, empty factories… who’d want to own commercial property these days?
This article originally appeared on <a href="https://www.businessspectator.com.au/" target="_blank">Business Spectator</a>.  
 
 
 
</body></html>

Commercial property under pressure due to job cut trend: Alan Kohler

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sunland-group">Sunland Group</a> has officially lodged plans for its first Gold Coast apartment project since the departure of the Abedian family from the company three years ago, unveiling a new high-rise proposal for a prominent Broadbeach corner site on Old Burleigh Road.

The application was submitted by an entity directed by Tom Jamieson, stepson of longtime Sunland leader Soheil Abedian, and Riaz Rezvanipour, brother-in-law of Sahba Abedian, Soheil’s son.

Sunland acquired the 1,283 sqm site on the corner of Old Burleigh Road and Armrick Avenue for $9.5 million late last year and is now seeking approval for a <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/99-101-old-burleigh-road-broadbeach-qld-4218">42-storey tower with 81 apartments</a>.

<img alt="First look: Sunland Group returns to Broadbeach with new Old Burleigh Road tower plans" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="fea2946d-90ee-4cfc-babe-2a8ad5db2cb6" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/pers.png?VersionId=BV0fihJw31nDIQ8ozY_h3GbS8mxDyhnm" />

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/contreras-earl-architecture">Contreras Earl Architecture</a>, the proposed tower at 99-101 Old Burleigh Road would deliver a predominantly larger-format apartment mix aimed at the owner-occupier market. Plans include 17 two-bedroom apartments, 55 three-bedroom apartments, and nine four-bedroom residences across 35 residential levels.

The development also incorporates three basement levels, four podium parking levels, two levels of communal recreation facilities, and rooftop plant and equipment. A total of 189 car spaces are proposed, significantly exceeding the 90 spaces required under the planning scheme.

The architecture adopts a sculpted, curvilinear form, with deep wraparound balconies and integrated landscaping intended to soften the tower’s vertical expression. The planning report states the building’s “slender footprint/form provides a complimentary yet varied built form within the local streetscape” and contributes to “a varied, yet ordered skyline.”

Contreras Earl noted in its Architectural Statement that from the early stages, the project addressed a fundamental challenge: how to accommodate the required residential yield while avoiding the conventional model of a tower sitting on a rigid, fully resolved parking podium.

“The most direct response would have been to consolidate parking into a singular, flat podium and extrude a repetitive tower above,” the statement said. “While efficient, this approach would result in a consolidated built form with limited engagement with the surrounding landscape and public realm.”

Instead, the conventional podium model was “deliberately rejected”. The architects described the base of the building as “a landscaped architectural condition where structure, planting and circulation are integrated”.

“Rather than presenting a continuous built mass, the base of the building is articulated through a series of concrete planter elements that organise the podium into a fragmented system,” the statement said. “This approach reduces the perceived bulk of the lower levels while establishing a more permeable interface with the streetscape and adjacent open space.”

<img alt="Sunland" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="923fad8d-c960-4527-8fbe-975cf1ddf88d" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-25%20at%2010.32.03%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=pngwb0hYOIUpq9vDw6F2EsOiVuHF3DiX" />

&nbsp;

The site sits within the High Density Residential Zone and inside the City of Gold Coast’s unrestricted “HX” building height area, where the planning framework anticipates intensified residential development tied to the expanding light rail corridor. The planning report notes the area is undergoing “transition toward more intense development forms” given its proximity to Broadbeach, Surfers Paradise, and high-frequency public transport infrastructure.

Positioned directly opposite Broadbeach Park and within walking distance of Florida Gardens light rail station, the development would sit among a rapidly evolving stretch of Old Burleigh Road that has become one of the Gold Coast’s most active apartment development corridors.

The application joins a growing pipeline of luxury residential projects reshaping Broadbeach, including nearby developments by 5Point Projects, Polycell, and Graya.

The planning report argues the project contributes toward the Gold Coast’s long-term housing targets under the South East Queensland Regional Plan, which forecasts the need for more than 100,000 additional high-rise dwellings across the city by 2046.

<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-4" data-turn="assistant" data-turn-id="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-1" data-turn-id-container="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-1" dir="auto">
The Abedian family departed Sunland Group in late 2023, ending a four-decade association with the company, and subsequently established the private development firm Abedian &amp; Co. The group is currently delivering <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/greenmount-residences-cnr-hill-street-and-marine-parade-coolangatta-qld-4225">Greenmount Residences</a> at Rainbow Bay and recently launched <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/18-mary-avenue-14-18-mary-avenue-broadbeach-qld-4218">18 Mary Avenue</a> in Broadbeach.
</section>

Joel Robinson

First look: Sunland Group returns to Broadbeach new apartment market with new Old Burleigh Road tower plans

The Minns Labor Government has established the new Bays West Delivery Authority to lead the development&nbsp;of the Bays West Precinct and Blackwattle Bay Precinct.&nbsp;

The Authority is charged with creating Sydney’s newest precinct, a thriving, connected, sustainable hub with White Bay Power Station as its cultural heart. Its vision is to build on the area’s natural, cultural and industrial history to shape a vibrant new neighbourhood.

The precinct will deliver up to 8,500 well-located homes, including a minimum of 10 per cent affordable and essential worker homes. Combine new housing with public open space, opening public access to the waterfront for the first time in more than 100 years, while retaining important deep-water facilities to support Sydney’s working harbour.

Located just minutes from the Sydney CBD and connected to a world-class metro, ferry, walking and cycling links, the Bays West precinct will rebalance housing growth towards well-serviced inner-city locations and help tackle the state’s housing crisis.

The Bays West Delivery Authority,&nbsp;an agency of the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure, will report to the NSW Minister for Lands and Property who already has oversight of major precinct renewal projects including at Blackwattle Bay and Barangaroo.

As part of the broader Bays West transformation, the Minns Government recently announced that a proposal from Lendlease to redevelop part of the Bays West Precinct has progressed to Stage 2 of the NSW Government’s unsolicited proposals process.

<img alt="Sydney" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="2ed71eb9-d8e8-4fa7-b9d1-de4531dcf2f3" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-25%20at%209.42.31%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=IDryFIbped9SNDg72LEN_EecvhUsOPvp" />

The Minns Labor Government has also confirmed the Bays West precinct will have a new suburb name. This will be the first major suburb built in close proximity to Sydney’s CBD in decades and will encompass the area currently being referred to as Bays West, including Glebe Island and the White Bay Power Station. Served by a new Metro station just five minutes from the CBD, it will become one of the most populous suburbs in the Inner West and one of Sydney’s premier cultural destinations.

An early works program is taking shape, which&nbsp;includes the first stages of an international design competition.&nbsp;

The aim of the Bays West&nbsp;International&nbsp;Design Competition is to&nbsp;ensure design excellence is embedded in the project from the start. The competition will deliver an&nbsp;urban framework that defines the character, ambition and long-term identity of&nbsp;this&nbsp;former industrial precinct as it transitions to a vibrant, inclusive and sustainable residential&nbsp;neighbourhood.

The competition will be led by the Bays West Delivery Authority in partnership with Government Architect NSW.&nbsp;

It will launch with an invitation for a global Expressions of Interest, before moving to an invitation-only stage that will be assessed by a panel that&nbsp;will provide advice to Cabinet who will select a winner.

Premier of NSW, Chris Minns said the establishment of the new Authority is the first step in transforming the Bays West precinct into a vibrant, livable suburb minutes from the Sydney CBD and two stops from Hunter St Station on the Metro West line.

“The Authority will deliver well-located homes close to the heart of the city and integrate the new precinct with Blackwattle Bay and the new Sydney Fish Market.

“This is a generational opportunity to build a new suburb on the city’s edge and open the harbour foreshore to the public for the first time in a century.”&nbsp;

Minister for Lands and Property Steve Kamper said the new Bays West Delivery Authority established by the Minns Government will turbocharge the development of Sydney’s newest suburb.

“The Authority is working at a record pace to deliver an international design competition, planning pathways and a financial model so that this development benefits Sydney with well-designed homes in a central location, close to public transport, jobs, entertainment and essential services.

“If we want Sydney to stay liveable and affordable, we need to be bold about using underutilised government-owned land to deliver homes for the future while making sure essential working harbour functions can be accommodated.”

Bays West Delivery Authority established to "turbocharge" Sydney’s newest suburb

Around 400 additional homes could be built at Southwark Grounds on Port Road, lifting total site capacity from 1300 to around 1700 dwellings.

A recently approved code amendment would allow apartment towers of up to 14 storeys in some areas of Renewal SA’s redevelopment of the former West End Brewery.

Renewal SA Acting Chief Executive Shane Wingard said he welcomed the code amendment, with the increase in heights and homes making a positive impact on the supply of high-quality, well-connected housing close to the city.

“By going higher across some parts of Southwark Grounds, we are adding a substantial number of very well-located homes with little impact on project delivery time or planned open space,” Mr Wingard said.

Since the project officially launched in 2025, Mr Wingard said more than 12,000 enquiries had been received about living at Southwark Grounds.

“The very strong early interest we’ve seen since homes were first released in the precinct reinforces our plans to create more housing opportunities,” he said.

The Southwark Grounds code amendment was launched in December last year, with community engagement undertaken over five weeks from January.

It proposed increasing maximum building heights from eight to 14 storeys on the eastern section of Southwark Grounds, and to 12 storeys across the remainder of the site, with minimum building heights ranging from two to four storeys.

The code amendment was implemented through an Early Commencement policy in late January, allowing developers to quickly explore the viability of increased height and housing yield while other planning processes continue.

One of the first developers delivering apartment sites have already finalised redesigns to increase the number of apartments following the code amendment.

Samaras’ development adjacent to the future Colonel Light Park is now planning to deliver 125 apartments across 11 storeys, significantly greater than original plans of around 50 apartments across four storeys.

The developer is also exploring the potential for additional affordable housing outcomes.

Most of the apartments at Southwark Grounds will be delivered within a master-planned precinct on a large parcel of land on the eastern portion of the site, covering around two-thirds of its 8.4 hectares.

Wingard said detailed precinct planning over the coming months may identify further opportunities to increase yield further that could see total apartment numbers at Southwark Grounds, exceed this number.

Affordable homes at Southwark Grounds will also see a net increase, with Renewal SA maintaining its commitment to a minimum of 20 per cent affordable housing across the development.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Civil works have begun across the site, with construction under way on the first new roads surrounding a townhouse precinct in the south‑west corner of Southwark Grounds. This includes Renewal SA’s 17 Founder’s Row homes, which are on track for completion by Christmas.

“We expect to have people living at Southwark Grounds by the end of the year, so delivering roads and public spaces for those residents is among our highest priorities.”

Construction of 40 townhouses off Anderson Street, known as West Village and being delivered by Contour, is forecast to begin in mid‑2026. Kolabb’s Anderson Lane development will follow shortly after, delivering a further 26 townhouses.

Southwark Grounds is a state government‑led urban renewal project now set to deliver around 1,700 homes over the next decade.

Homes will be supported by a supermarket, a range of retail and hospitality offerings anchored by a revitalised Walkerville Brew Tower, a childcare centre, car parking and well‑connected public spaces.

400 new homes planned for Adelaide's former West End Brewery site

Brisbane developer&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/cavcorp">Cavcorp</a> has lodged plans for a new mixed-use residential development at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/55-wyandra-street-teneriffe-qld-4005">55 Wyandra Street</a>, Teneriffe, anchored by an 85-metre public laneway designed to reconnect the suburb’s riverfront with the Gasworks precinct.

The buildings, known as Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane, would replace the existing Queensland Cotton head office site with a 15-storey residential tower transitioning to eight storeys toward Helen Street. The project has been designed by Plazibat Architects and lodged as a code assessable development application for 93 apartments across a 3,401 sqm mixed-use site within the Newstead and Teneriffe Waterfront neighbourhood plan.

Central to the scheme is the transformation of an existing service easement into a publicly accessible cross-block connection linking Wyandra and Helen Streets. Cavcorp says the new laneway will act as both a pedestrian shortcut and a landscaped civic space between the Teneriffe Riverwalk, ferry terminal, and Gasworks precinct.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="26e7f058-b065-4de8-b13d-a2b8cb64dfcc" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/bldg.png?VersionId=sELS0ZKYi361oYipUa1BIKfe_.DLZoFV" />

“The revised proposal delivers a legacy public-realm cross-block link, permanently secured for community use, transforming an existing private easement into a safe, high-quality pedestrian connection between the Teneriffe heritage riverwalk and the Gasworks–Long Island precinct,” the planning report states.

The laneway will sit beneath a large subtropical loggia integrated into the podium levels of the development. The design incorporates deep landscaping, water gardens, lobby spaces, business lounges, and ground-floor apartments to create what Cavcorp describes as a climate-responsive “urban verandah.”

The tower itself has been designed as a slender form with recessed floorplates and curved translucent corners inspired by contemporary Japanese architecture. The building height aligns with the Commercial Road precinct controls, which permit towers up to 15 storeys within proximity to Longland Street.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="a8a17d40-43b6-4718-b3fd-67676fcbb485" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/pers%202_1.png?VersionId=i3VwDtp5AmL_8InW7w4qRbDFEpb744Jt" />

The project will comprise a mix of larger-format apartments aimed at owner-occupiers, downsizers, and families. The proposed apartment mix includes 11 loggia apartments across the lower levels, 50 four-bedroom Sky-Terrace apartments from levels three to seven, and 32 Sky-Pool Homes occupying the upper tower levels. The Sky-Pool Homes will feature private thermal plunge pools integrated into oversized balconies.

According to the application, the apartments are intended to reinterpret the scale and character of Teneriffe’s woolstore conversions and Queensland homes within a vertical residential format.

“The sky-pool homes build on Cavcorp’s previous projects and introduce a distinct apartment typology to Teneriffe, informed by both local and international precedent and responding to an identified market demand for enhanced safety, space and amenity,” the planning submission notes.

A major focus of the proposal is its five-level wellness and lifestyle offering, extending from the basement through to the rooftop.

Amenities proposed include a rooftop Swim &amp; Racquet Club with a 25-metre Olympic lap pool and tennis court, coworking spaces and libraries, golf simulators, wine storage, concierge facilities, business lounges, pet wash areas, and rooftop longevity-focused wellness spaces with spas, outdoor fitness zones, and landscaped terraces.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="944b352c-49b9-4247-a4c6-5967b4b69fda" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/amenity.png?VersionId=Ed_qKjAtMwFT.5gfl3jiA9QwdWxSMsaX" />

All parking will be concealed within basement levels accessed from Wyandra and Helen Streets. Cavcorp says the deep-basement engineering approach allows the entire ground plane to prioritise landscaping, pedestrian movement, and active frontage rather than vehicle infrastructure.

The development continues Cavcorp’s concentration in Newstead and Teneriffe, where the Brisbane developer has delivered a number of apartment projects including Lucent, Le Bain, and Luminare, as well as the Long Island Wellness Precinct nearby. Several of those projects have received national design and architecture awards, including recognition under Brisbane’s “Buildings that Breathe” program.

Cavcorp unveils wellness-focused Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane apartment buildings

Focus Group Investments has lodged plans for a new apartment development at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/64-70-hanover-street-fitzroy-vic-3065">64–70 Hanover Street</a> in Fitzroy, seeking to utilise the Victorian Government’s recently introduced Great Design Fast Track pathway to accelerate approvals for the project.

The proposal is among the latest developments to emerge through the state-led initiative, which was established to fast-track well-designed residential projects in activity centres and transport-connected inner-city locations. The pathway allows qualifying developments that meet elevated design and housing benchmarks to bypass traditional council planning timeframes and instead be assessed directly by the Department of Transport and Planning.

Designed by SJB, the development will comprise a mix of apartments above activated lower levels, with a strong focus on architectural articulation, landscaping, and communal amenity. The design response seeks to balance the industrial character of Richmond’s former warehouse precincts with a more contemporary residential form.

<img alt="First look: Focus Group Investments taps Victoria’s Great Design Fast Track for Richmond apartments" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="abea51cc-d85b-479e-9aef-a589f3b37ca7" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/ground.png?VersionId=e1Kf8EyPWwyiVumtqQ4rM5S4GpOR3CCz" />

Proposed are 63 new dwellings, a wide ranging mix of studio, one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments, and townhouses and duplexes. They will be spread across a part-three, part-eight storey building.

The Planning and Urban Context Report by Tract says the development is of an "exemplary architectural standard" and has been carefully crafted by SJB Architects.

"Dwellings&nbsp;will benefit from excellent access to natural light, cross-ventilation opportunities and extensive communal space," the report noted.

The architectural material highlights the project’s integration of landscaped elements and communal spaces throughout the building. The proposal also incorporates sustainability initiatives aligned with the Victorian Government’s push for higher-performing apartment developments under the fast-track program.

The Great Design Fast Track was unveiled by the Victorian Government in 2024 as part of a broader housing supply strategy aimed at accelerating the delivery of new homes. Projects assessed through the pathway must demonstrate high-quality architecture, sustainability outcomes, and housing diversity while being located close to public transport and existing infrastructure.

<img alt="First look: Focus Group Investments taps Victoria’s Great Design Fast Track for Richmond apartments" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="afdbe834-8dc4-4a77-a943-ba07bc927348" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/site_11.png?VersionId=0J657j.TaChAZfp93wqJYBTqSsnREJx2" />

Focus Group, founder and led by Paul De Lutiis, is increasingly active across Melbourne’s inner suburbs, targeting well-connected urban renewal locations suited to medium and higher-density residential development. The Fitzroy proposal continues that strategy, leveraging the area’s strong transport links, established retail amenity, and proximity to the CBD.

Fitzroy has been one of the most popular spots for developers and buyers in recent years. The likes of PACE Development Group, SMA Projects, Crema Group and Chapter Group, currently selling projects in the suburb.

Alan Kohler

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News