Million dollar properties in remote Sydney suburbs

I am researching suburbs to buy a house (new/existing). I come across (keep getting suggested by facebook/google/etc) these string of suburbs on Windsor road in western/north west sydney like Ponds, Kellyville, Schoffields, etc.
I fail to understand why people are buying these houses spending atleast a million each.
These suburbs are literally centre of nowhere, near to nothing and going anywhere using public transport a pain.
People who are already living in these suburbs can throw some light?
Am I missing something?

Comments

  • Views, streams, lakes, and coastal properties are finite.

    There are millions dollar coastal properties that are not even close to acreage 6±+ hours from CBD. They're also quite tightly held.

  • 2 words "housing bubble"

    I still like the story of Mount Druitt which is 38km west of Sydney, home to a large amount of people who were in the lowest quartile in terms of earnings, high unemployment was ravaged by crime and drug problems. Now is home to multimillion dollar homes which have set up next to crack dens, and it's still 38km away from Sydney!

    it didn't matter how far away it was, it was a block of land on which a house could be built, because after all, land appreciates infinitely! doubling every 10 years

    Houses are only worth what people are prepared to pay for it, with the banks the big enablers.

    • The story of Mount Druitt which is 38km west of Sydney, home to a large amount of people who were in the lowest quartile in terms of earnings, high unemployment was ravaged by crime and drug problems. Now is home to multimillion dollar homes which have set up next to crack dens

      What a generalisation …

  • I fail to understand why people are buying these houses spending atleast a million each.

    Because equivalent properties (i.e. freestanding 4/5 bed, backyard, double garage, etc.) in the inner suburbs are significantly more expensive. In some suburbs, equivalent properties can be $3m to $4m … and I'm not talking those with great views, etc., simply equivalent properties in different locations.

    So it comes down to supply and demand and personal preference … if your budget is $1m (for the sake of this discussion), you can buy the properties you've described on the fringe of the city, or get a decent two bedroom apartment in an inner-suburb. Some do the former, others the latter.

    • I already own an apartment which is nowhere appreciating. I do not want to land in a situation where I somehow trace that money, invest and then it depreciates. But based on what you say, chances of that happening is very rare.

      • Whether it will go up or down in value over any given period of time is a matter of speculation and a separate point.

        The simple fact of it in Sydney is if you want the "family home with a backyard, etc." you've got to either live on the fringe of the city or be able to come up with $2m, $3m, $4m to have it in a more central suburb.

        What is a reality is that Sydney is one of the more desirable cities in the world to live and people pay a pretty penny to do so. Sydney is no longer a global backwater with relatively abundant land inhabited by people of relatively low incomes and wealth. I'm not saying that Sydney used to be a dump, but 50 years ago it certainly wasn't the city it is now. You'll see that property prices in Sydney have moved into line with the world's major cities.

      • +2 votes

        Another factor is with properties, it's only the land that increases in value.

        The building doesn't appreciate, in fact depreciates over time, hence why your apartment unfortunately isn't appreciating.

      • Apartment and housing market is two different markets.

        Apartment: don't expect appreciation because there will always be new stock but you can expect 7% - 8% gross rental.

        Houses: perception lack of available land in a particular location. Everyone wants house on land close to amenities but the spread is enormous.

        As investments, apartments (pre COVID) would have paid for itself after 25 / 30 years and you get regular monthly income. For houses you will be tipping in for 10 or maybe 20 years and you'd have to sell up to realise capital gains.

  • I fail to understand why people are buying these houses spending atleast a million each.

    People buy stuff because they can. People look at buying a house as a form of saving because if you don't make them pay a monthly mortgage they would spend it on stuff.

    • if you don't make them pay a monthly mortgage they would spend it on stuff.

      That's me. :)

  • Kellyville is for people who cannot afford to buy in Winston Hills.

    People who buy in Winston Hills can't afford to buy in Baulkham Hills..

    People who buy in Baulkham Hills can't afford to buy in Castle Hill..