Does Past Growth Predict Future Growth? (Property Data Dive)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2TkAOaidtg&ab;_channel=OnProperty

Experts often tell us that the more a suburb has grown in the past means that suburb is more likely to grow in the future. But is that actually true and does the property data back up this idea:

High Property Growth History is a Red Flag

Select Residential Property

0:00 - Introduction1:38 - Why the opposite might actually be true4:45 - What does the data tell us?9:50 - Last 10 years vs next 10 years12:15 - Applying this to cities and larger markets15:00 - Performance of significant urban areas over the last 30 years

Recommended Videos:

Why Population Growth Does NOT Predict Capital Growth (Data Dive)

Transcription

Ryan 0:00Experts often tell us that the more a suburb has grown in the path or a suburb with good growth history means that that's above is also likely to grow in the future. So does the past predict the future in terms of Southern growth? But is that is that actually true? Are we actually making these decisions based on data? Or someone just told us this and you know, general consensus has just kind of agreed to it and gone along with it. So today, I have with me, Jeremy Shepherd from select residential property, to look at the data behind this and say, okay, does pass growth actually predict future growth? Or could the opposite be true? And I absolutely love Jeremy, that you just take a super data approach to this. And you're happy to, I guess, come over the top with some, I guess, counterintuitive views on what may be happening here and just provide us with these knowledge bombs of insight. So super excited for this one.

Jeremy 0:56Yeah. Well, thanks very much for having me. on your show, Ryan. And this is this is a topic that I I get a lot of heated arguments with, with experts about Yeah, so I'm always falling back on what the data says Show me.

Ryan 1:10What is the premise here that the experts are saying, why why do they think that? If an area has grown Well, in the past, it's going to grow? Well, in the future? What is their reasoning? Do you think?

Jeremy 1:23Right question. I actually, it is it is peculiar. Why is it just because it did in the past? Why does that mean it will in the future? Because my initial reaction is, well, if it's if it's grown too much in the past, if it's outperformed, and put a massive gap between itself and you know, its neighboring suburbs? Don't the neighboring suburbs look more attractive, because they're now relatively affordable by comparison. And that's the whole concept of this ripple effect where, you know, you have the ideal suburb, everyone's buying there, they love it, prices go up too high. And then people look for the next best. So they think, well, it's not ideal, but it's it's close enough. And so that reduces demand for the ideal suburb, because then it's unaffordable, and increases demand for the next best thing. And that just keeps happening. And it all ripples outwards from, you know, the most affluent, exclusive suburbs.

Ryan 2:26Right, our saying today, you would you would expect from the data, the opposite to be true that if a suburb has grown significantly in the past, then it's less likely to see growth in the near to medium term future.

Jeremy 2:39That's right. But as as things just balance out,

Ryan 2:41or Yeah, may not be triggered growth, but my won't necessarily see more growth in comparison to other suburbs close by.

Jeremy 2:49Yeah, that's right. And I do use this. apples and oranges analogy, where picture yourself in a fruit shop 100 years ago,