Micro Real Estate Investing? - What Are The Smallest Legitimate Investments Possible in Real Estate and / or Land?

so you can buy part of a bitcoin
you can buy a single share in a company

but what about with real estate - how micro can an investment get?

for example you can't seem to buy land by the square meter, or buy part of a house.

or can you?

google gives me a few results when i search for things like 'micro real estate' but i don't know what is legit, or if any of it is

amusingly i've seen people flogging off the moon and mars a block at a time after just announcing they were claiming it for themselves

i've seen people selling parking spaces and graves



  • I can sell you a couple of sqm if you like.

    Oh wait, no, the bank owns it right?..

  • Didn't something like this come up in your online search:

    It is legit (to the extent of the stated limitations "You obtain a personal right to a souvenir plot of land and our permission to use our registered trademarks, Laird, Lord and Lady of Glencoe")

    Free shipping
    4.8 star overall reviews

    As an investment? Probably not.

    Maybe look at buying car spaces in a CBD.

  • +11 votes

    REITs on the ASX

  • There have been specialised investments like Purple Bricks("invest in a house for as little as $100"), but they have copped an absolute caning by some analysts on being a dud - do a lot of research and satisfy yourself before springing.

  • You can buy land for under $10k, but it doesn't have any building entitlement.
    Fine if you want to camp there.

    • Got an example? I tried a quick google search, but given the generic terms I could only find simple articles about it and what-if's on whirlpool.

      • I was thinking of North Arm Cove in NSW.
        See below to understand the history.
        If you search realestate.com.au for your state, under $50000 you will find other examples.


        • Why can none of those people construct a proper sentence in English?

          • @brendanm: It seems they can't construct a house either.

            • @BOGOF: So true. I wanted to find out why, but couldn't stand reading any more of that nonsense.

              • @brendanm: As I understand it, a “developer” drew up plans to make an estate 100 years ago.
                The council declined their development application, refusing to allow buildings. The developer sold the lots anyway, which is fine, and was upfront saying that there were no building entitlements.
                Over time, other developments happened in the usual way with approvals before sales, and the sellers of North Arm Cove property said, “who knows? It seems likely one day development will be approved - so you can buy now for peanuts, and make a killing in 15 or 20 years if building is allowed”.

                But the council never changed their mind.
                And because none of these blocks can be occupied, the owners can vote in local elections, so they have no voice on council.
                And other locals don’t want a 2000 lot development in this otherwise lovely bush land, so their neighbours have no desire to vote for a candidate that might allow change.

                And fundamentally, these folk all got what they paid for, but thought they were smart and development would surely be allowed. But now it’s becoming less likely, so they are getting upset their clever scheme didn’t pay off.

  • Want to buy a share of some land on the moon?

  • https://coincentral.com/real-estate-tokenization-why-stephan...

    Stephane De Baets Owns the St. Regis Aspen Resort, and You Can Too: Enter Tokenization


    A First For Manhattan: $30M Real Estate Property Tokenized With Blockchain



    • Similar investment without blockchain hype is asx:urf
      Spoiler, it hasn’t been a good investment as the fees and charges were very high.

      • It's nascent. Give it idea another 20 years to mature.

        • Trouble is they (urf) spent money renovating properties, and ended up with a cashflow negative fund.
          So they had to restructure and refinance, and it ended poorly, with 75% wealth destruction for many investors.
          This super sucked, as it was part of Dixon’s who pushed a lot of their smsf clients into it at $1+ prices (now trades at 20c).

          Basically, they overpaid for properties, paid their managing agents too much, spent too much on renovations, borrowed at too high rates and ended up going backwards each month.
          So now the SHTF, and they have had to sell some properties to get things back on a n even keel.
          The risk is, however, they sold the good properties and are left with the duds.

          I am across it because I liked the investment thesis (asx exposure to ny real estate post GFC) but it has been a lesson in mismanagement - except the managers got paid handsomely.