State Street Global Advisors, M&G Investments, Oxera, Jupiter, Franklin Templeton Investments, Insight InvestmentState Street Global Advisors – The asset manager has appointed Helen Copinger-Symes as managing director and head of consultant relations for the EMEA region. She joins from Alliance Bernstein, where she spent six years as consultant relations director before taking on the role of head of business development and client relations for its defined benefits business. Before then, she was head of consultant relations at Invesco Asset Management, and head of defined contribution sales at Deutsche Asset Management.M&G Investments – David Parson has been appointed as an investment specialist within M&G’s institutional public debt business. He joins from BlackRock, where he was senior product strategist in sterling fixed income.Oxera – The consultancy has expanded further in Europe, with a new office in Berlin and senior hires in Brussels. Michael Kraus – an expert in energy, regulation and litigation, who joins from NERA – is to head the Berlin office. In Brussels, Pascale Déchamps joins as a senior adviser, with 10 years’ experience in EU and French competition cases at CRA. Christian Huveneers, former vice-chairman of the Belgian Competition Council and now one of the assessors at the new Competition Council, joins as a part-time associate. Jupiter – Katherine Dryer has been appointed a fixed interest and multi-asset product specialist. She will join in December from BlackRock, where she carried out a similar role. She has also held fixed interest roles at Morgan Stanley Investment Management and Deutsche Asset Management.Franklin Templeton Investments – Rod MacPhee has been appointed research analyst and portfolio manager in the Franklin Templeton Fixed Income Group. He joins from Western Asset Management Group, where he has been a portfolio analyst since 2006. Before then, he was a client relationship manager at Canada-based Group Retirement Services.Insight Investment – David Beca has been appointed head of farmland management. He joins from NZ Farming Systems Uruguay, where he has served as managing director and chief executive since 2011. He has also worked at Intelact Nutrition, Red Sky Agricultural and Northland Cooperative Dairy Company.
MN – the €90bn asset manager and pensions provider for the Dutch metal schemes PMT and PME, as well as the pension fund for the merchant navy (Koopvaardij) – is to adjust its governance structure to improve its “battle-readiness” and “clarify its profile”.Until now, the social partners of employers and workers owned 95% of MN.In the new set-up, this stake is to be equally shared with both metal schemes, while Koopvaardij will keep its 5% stake.In a joint statement, the parties said the new structure was meant to improve the schemes’ involvement in MN’s strategic direction and governance. The metal schemes and MN have also defined the products and services MN is to offer, its target markets and where the decisions for assignments will be taken, particularly on pensions policy, administration, asset management, insurance and social arrangements.PMT, PME and MN stressed that the principle that MN was a company for the social partners would remain unchanged.They added that the strategic focus would remain on clients linked to the metal industry and the maritime sector, with benefits of scale, knowledge-sharing and cost-cutting being the chief aims.However, they noted that the provider could also target other players, if the existing clients agreed.Michiel Cleij, spokesman at MN, said: “The new structure is to offer shorter links, which should improve cooperation, to enable MN to act more decisively on challenges in the sector.”He pointed out that the changes at MN had been triggered by developments in the market, such as ongoing consolidation among pension funds, as well as continuing adjustments to the Dutch pensions system.In 2001, MN was one of the first pension providers to become independent from its pension fund, the metal scheme PMT.The three parties stressed that MN would remain an independent entity, and keep its own responsibilities as a pensions provider.Currently, in the UK, MN has seven clients and £2.5bn (€3bn) in assets under fiduciary management.
This week began with a long-winded and desperate call from London mayor Boris Johnson for the merging of all public sector pension funds, in order to fund the construction of vital infrastructure. In his weekly column in UK national paper The Daily Telegraph, Johnson claims the UK’s more than 39,000 public sector pension funds are all running silo operations, leading to extraordinary waste.However, London’s two-term mayor, employing his customarily colourful language, goes on to suggest that the UK has missed a huge opportunity, one being exploited by “more sensible governments around the world.” This opportunity, according to Johnson, is to pool pension funds and create “gigantic sovereign wealth funds”, which could invest in infrastructure. He singles out Canada, the Netherlands and Singapore as examples of countries having done this. Amalgamating the 101 funded local authority funds would collect assets of around £180bn and, Johnson said, after adding the remainder of the 39,000 public sector schemes, create a pot worth “hundreds of billions” of pounds.The Mayor’s basic premise is not wrong in and of itself – IPE has previously suggested that a common investment vehicle for the local authority funds could in theory work quite well, with infrastructure exposure a big winner. But that is a common investment vehicle, not the amalgamation of funds – particularly unfunded ones that have no assets. Of the 39,000 public sector pension scheme figure repeatedly used by Johnson, practically all are unfunded pay-as-you-go set-ups, with contributions paying out pensions, and the government picking up the shortfall, hence no assets to invest. Flaw number one.Second, a “citizen’s wealth fund” is not the purpose of pension schemes. Their primary purpose is not to stimulate economies or take control of the £100bn of infrastructure needed in the UK. They do not belong to the government nor all the citizens of the UK. They are the sole property of the beneficiaries, and survive to serve their retirement needs. Yes, there is certainly space for infrastructure investment within this, and yes, IPE agrees it could be more efficient. But the proposal to merge thousands of funds borders on the ludicrous. Third, there is a conception among politicians that pension funds hold back from infrastructure due to their own scale. While it certainly is a deterrent for some smaller schemes, there are wider issues to consider. One is simply risk/return payoffs. There have been numerous attempts to get pension schemes in the UK to invest, but many remain apprehensive without underlying government guarantees.The Pensions Infrastructure Platform – a method of channelling investment into infrastructure “for pension schemes, by pension schemes” – had a sluggish start and, in the three years since conception, only managed about £200m of secondary asset investment. Three of its founding members left over cost and return concerns.There is also an issue with availability of assets. ABP, name-checked by Johnson, only has just over 1% of its assets in infrastructure. The London Pension Fund Authority (LPFA) – whose chairman, Eddie Truell, is a strong advocate of pension scheme infrastructure investment – only has 3.5%, or £170m, and that’s after making an effort.This leads onto the final point, and, as with all political statements, one has to look at who, or what, is behind it. Truell and Johnson’s strong relationship is well known, as is the LPFA’s stance on merging local government schemes, particularly in London, with itself at the core. Its recent response to a government consultation on the future of local authority funds strongly supported mergers, only for Johnson’s Conservative colleagues in Whitehall to rule it out.The pair have long worked together to promote investment, with Johnson sharing Truell’s dream of the LPFA to incorporate all London funds with huge investment in the city’s housing and infrastructure. So one questions where Johnson’s musings originate. The pair has often sung from the same hymn sheet, although one would expect Truell’s copy to differentiate between a funded and unfunded pension scheme.
SPK was another big winner on the night, scooping up the awards for Portfolio Construction, Risk Management and Sweden.British Steel Pension Fund won the awards for In-house Investment Team and the United Kingdom. Danish pension fund PensionDanmark was the stand-out winner at the 2014 IPE Awards in Vienna, taking home the coveted Best European Pension Fund award.The pension fund also won the award for Best Infrastructure Investor, whilst sharing the country award for Denmark with Industriens Pension.Mats Andersson, chief executive at Swedish buffer fund AP4, won the Outstanding Industry Contribution award, while Penny Green – who is to retire as chief executive at the SAUL Trustee Company at the end of this year – was named Pension Fund Personality of the Year.The fourth Gold Award – for Best Long-Term Investment Strategy – was shared by Kingfisher Pension Scheme and PKA. The full winners list for the 2014 IPE AwardsGold AwardsBest European Pension Fund: PensionDanmark Outstanding Industry Contribution: Mats Andersson Pension Fund Personality of the Year: Penny Green Long Term Investment Strategy: Kingfisher Pension Trustee Limited and PKASilver AwardsBest Corporate Pension Fund: Bosch Pensionsfonds AG Best Industry-wide Pension Fund: NEST Best Public Pension Fund: Fjärde AP-fonden (AP4) Best Small European Pension Fund: Frjálsi Pension Fund Bronze AwardsAlternatives: PKAEquities: Fonditel BFixed Income: Bayerische VersorgungskammerThemed AwardsActive Management: Allianz Pensionskasse AG Climate Related Risk Management: Environment Agency Pension Fund Commodities: APG DC/Hybrid Strategy: Industriens Pension Diversification: NEST Emerging Markets: Superannuation Arrangements of the University of London (SAUL)ESG: Environment Agency Pension Fund and Pensioenfonds Zorg en Welzijn (PFZW)Infrastructure: PensionDanmark In-house Investment Team: British Steel Pension Fund Innovation: BT Pension Scheme Portfolio Construction: SPK Real Estate: Pension Protection Fund (PPF) Risk Management: SPK Smart Beta: SEB Pension Specialist Investment Managers: MNOPF Trustees Ltd CountriesAustria Pensionskasse: APK Pensionskasse AG Austria Vorsogekasse: fair-finance Vorsorgekasse Belgium: Integrale and Amonis OFP Central & Eastern Europe: NLB Nov Penziski Fond Denmark: Industriens Pension Finland: The State Pension Fund (VER)France: FRR Germany bAV: Linde Custodian e.V. Germany Versorgungswerk: Bayerische Versorgungskammer and Ärzteversorgung Westfalen-Lippe Ireland: Construction Workers’ Pension Scheme Italy: Fondenergia Netherlands: ABN AMRO Pensioenfonds Norway: OPF Portugal: Horizonte-3 Open Pension Funds of Pensõesgere Small Countries: Frjálsi Pension Fund Spain: Geroa Pentsioak EPSV Sweden: SPK Switzerland: Pension Fund SBB United Kingdom: British Steel Pension Fund Read all the coverage from the IPE Conference & Awards in Vienna, and watch video interviews with some of its speakers
Large swathes of the revised IORP Directive, including the proposed risk-evaluation for pensions (REP), are to be cut under plans drawn up by European parliamentarian Brian Hayes.The Irish MEP, IORP rapporteur for the European Parliament’s Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee (ECON), also said the introduction of the holistic balance sheet (HBS) was “not realistic in practical terms” and proposed changes to cross-border funding arrangements.In his preliminary report on the Directive, Hayes suggested that neither the European Commission nor the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) had the power to draft additional technical standards – essentially removing the ability to impose additional requirements without parliamentary scrutiny.He also raised concerns about EIOPA’s development of the HBS, arguing that the model was not “realistic in terms of costs and benefits” in light of pension fund diversity across Europe. Attempting to put to bed any speculation about the introduction of capital requirements without a further Directive, the report added that no capital requirements for IORPs based on either Solvency II or the HBS should be developed “at [EU] level”, as these could “potentially decrease the willingness of employers to provide occupational pensions”.The report also removed the requirements for the REP, instead suggesting a fund should conduct risk assessments in line with the “nature, scale and complexity of its activities”.Hayes’s stance comes after a number of changes to the REP, with a compromise draft drawn up by the Council of the EU last year suggesting individual member states would be granted powers to dictate the scale of assessment needed.The Commission’s initial proposal required a regular evaluation of internal risk management procedures, funding requirements and the impact of climate risk on the fund’s portfolio, among other areas.In what appears to be a well-intentioned attempt to remove requirements for full funding from cross-border IORPs, Hayes also proposed that IORP full funding requirements should only take effect from “the moment when the institution starts operating a new or additional scheme”.The wording echoes an earlier proposal to impose full funding requirements only when a cross-border fund is established, potentially allowing for a vehicle to be launched with a single, fully funded member.However, the wording proposed by Hayes made no mention of cross-border activities, implying that the full funding requirements would be imposed on all regulated IORPs.The parliamentarian also amended a clause specifying that member states should allow IORPs to be underfunded “for a limited period of time”, potentially opening the door to host member states to set recovery periods for cross-border funds under their jurisdiction.
UK sponsors will be unable to claim back tax for asset management costs paid on behalf of pension funds, according to the country’s tax office.The clarification comes in a policy paper by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) in response to a 2013 European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling following a case brought by Dutch engineering firm PPG Holdings.The HMRC said tripartite agreements – between sponsors, service providers and UK trustees – could still be subject to VAT rebates but would be ineligible for corporation-tax deductions.“In this context,” it said, “only costs recognised in the profit and loss account and contributions to pension schemes may attract a deduction for corporation tax purposes. “Direct payment by an employer of asset management costs does not clearly fall into either of these categories.”In a separate note by Linklaters, the law firm said the PPG ruling resulted in European tax offices no longer being able to distinguish between the treatment of administration costs and those incurred as a result of investment activities.“This ruling raised issues for HMRC, whose practice has been to let employers recover VAT incurred on scheme administration costs but not on investment costs,” it said. In 2014, in the wake of the PPG case, HMRC was forced to update its guidance.As a result, the tax office said its current approach to taxation would remain in place until the end of 2015 – a practice that has been extended for a further 12 months.PensionDanmark last year won a separate ECJ court case, brought by its service provider ATP, which saw defined contribution (DC) funds put on par with special investment vehicles.The ruling allowed PensionDanmark to reclaim DKK200m (€26m) in VAT charges levied against it due to its administration and investment management services.
KCM took over UK operations from MN in 2015. At the time, MN managed almost €11bn of UK pension assets, of which €3.5bn was in a fiduciary context.KCM said all clients had decided to stay, and that it had sealed a new €120m fiduciary contract since the deal.Kempen further made clear that it expected to start offering multi-asset and European high yield credit strategies this year. The company said it also planned to increase its focus on long-term investments, and has expanded the distribution of existing investment strategies in France and Germany.In other news, the €1bn pension fund of engineering firm Arcadis said that it was considering placing its pension plan with a general pension fund (APF) and that it was assessing proposals from three commercial players.On its website it made clear that its non-professional board and 10-strong pensions bureau were nearing their limits in an increasingly complicated regulatory and investment environment.It said that an APF could offer the expertise as well as cost benefits of a larger organisation, while still giving Arcadis sufficient control over its pension payments.According to the scheme, it deliberately opted for a general pension fund of a commercial player “as setting up an APF with other pension funds would be expensive and take a lot of time, while co-operation with other schemes has seldom turned out to be successful”.If joining an APF turned out not to be feasible for the Arcadis scheme, the board said it would consider further professionalising its staff and outsourcing more functions as a temporary alternative.Astrid Roelofs, the scheme’s director, said that, for example, its pensions administration and other parts of asset management could be outsourced.She also said that the pension fund is currently assessing how its illiquid investments could be transferred to an APF without additional transition costs or a forced sale.Last year, the pension fund contracted out management of its interest and inflation hedges to Cardano, citing “complicated management of derivatives following the European Market Infrastructure Regulation”.Finally, the €205bn asset manager PGGM said it had invested €150m in the construction of two huge and and sustainable distribution centres in Japan, in a co-investment with e-Shang Redwood (ESR).The decision came in the wake of a €200m investment in the purchase of similar objects elsewhere in the country.The most recent investment involved logistics buildings in the urban areas of Osaka and Tokyo.PGGM said the investment was in anticipation of a “very dynamic” market for both logistics and e-commerce in metropolitan areas, with a shortage of modern quake-proof facilities.In Japan, ESR is an important player in developing, constructing, and managing logistical property. The company also targets China.Guido Verhoef, PGGM’s head of private real estate, said the partnership with ESR “offered its clients direct access to the largest and most modern logistical projects in top locations in Asia with the strongest economic urban areas in the world”.“The fast urbanisation and growth in e-commerce lead to a strong increase of consumption as well as logistical innovation,” he added. “This offers great investment opportunities for the long term.”According to PGGM, the projects were of a new and “very sustainable” generation, with their energy needs largely generated by solar panels on the roof.As a consequence, carbon emissions would be 80% lower than average in the sector, the pension manager said. In addition, because of the solar panels’ shade, energy costs could be limited by 20%.PGGM also said that the concrete and asphalt used for construction would large be recycled material, and that rain water would be captured and re-used.Thijs Schoenaker, PGGM’s director for private real estate in Asia Pacific, said that both projects would generate an “attractive return”.So far PGGM – the asset manager for the €185bn healthcare scheme PFZW – has committed €736m in total to its strategic partnership with ESR. Kempen Capital Management (KCM) wants to make the UK its “second home market” and further expand its services, after successfully completing the transition of the British clients of MN.In its annual report for 2016, the €38bn Netherlands-based asset manager said it had appointed a managing director as well as a sales team for investment strategies for its London-based operations.The team has been tasked with focusing on investments and fiduciary management, KCM said.Last month, Kempen expanded its fiduciary team with the appointment of four members from Altis Investment Management.
The governor of Norges Bank is Øystein Olsen, who is also chair of Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM) – the central bank arm that runs the country’s sovereign wealth fund, the Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG).Olsen was in charge of appointing AKO Capital founder Nicolai Tangen as the new chief executive of NBIM at the end of March, following the announcement in October that Yngve Slyngstad was to step down.At the heart of a growing scandal in Norway are an email sent in January to the current NBIM chief executive from the wealthy hedge fund manager Tangen and subsequent questions about the nature of the relationship between Slyngstad and Tangen.In the email, which was among material disclosed by the bank to a Norwegian newspaper earlier this month in response to a request, Tangen asked Slyngstad to do him a favour by giving him information about the nature of the role of his successor.In November Slyngstad attended a lavishly-organised seminar in Philadelphia, at which his accommodation and private flight back to Oslo was paid for by the hedge fund tycoon.Norwegian media coverage raises questionsOn Saturday Norwegian daily VG ran a story about Tangen’s “Back To University” seminar in November.Referring to that article, Norges Bank yesterday published an extensive account of Slyngstad’s relationship with Tangen, all email contact that had gone on between them in the last four years, and the background to the recruitment process for a new chief executive.In that statement, the bank said a number of questions had been raised about the selection process for a new chief executive and conditions relating to Slyngstad’s participation at the seminar following VG’s article. In its summary of the process and answers to questions raised by the media, Norges Bank said Slyngstad had himself stated it was “unfortunate” that he travelled back from Pennsylvania to Oslo on the chartered flight with other conference attendees – rather than on a scheduled flight covered by Norges Bank.It was the first time that he had done this as head of the fund, the bank said.It also said Slyngstad had not replied to Tangen’s January email requesting information about the job of head of the GPFG, nor had he responded to a subsequently-forwarded invitation from Tangen to an event in London.“Slyngstad has not participated in the selection process,” Norges Bank said.The Norges Bank supervisory council consists of 15 members and is led by Julie Brodtkorb.Looking for IPE’s latest magazine? Read the digital edition here. The supervisory council of Norway’s central bank has announced it is holding an extraordinary meeting tomorrow morning to consider what the chair of the country’s NOK10.5trn (€91bn) oil fund has to say about controversial links between the fund’s newly-appointed chief executive and its outgoing head.The bank announced today: “Norges Bank’s Supervisory Board will hold an extraordinary meeting on Wednesday 22 April at 10.00.”The meeting will be a video conference.“The case under consideration is the process of hiring a new CEO of NBIM. The Governor will give an account of the process,” Norges Bank said in the announcement.
Hannoversche Kassen, a German occupational pensions provider for the non-profit sector, is calling for investment restrictions to be reviewed to expand investors’ portfolios with additional, and more specific, asset classes such as green infrastructure, Silke Stremlau, a member of the managing board, told IPE.The catalogue of investments, which is part of the Investment Ordinance Anlageverordnung, sets a detailed framework for the mix and diversification of investments of guaranteed assets of company pension schemes, in particular Pensionskassen, Sterbekassen and small insurance companies.“The investment catalogue should include additional asset classes, for example green infrastructure, and define higher thresholds for those types of investments [in green infrastructure], for example to up to 5%,” Stremlau said.The threshold for investing in additional asset classes should reflect their degree of risk “even more strongly,” she added. Pensionskassen can invest a maximum 1% of security assets in a renewable energy fund classified as a special alternative investment fund (AIF), she said.“Certainly understandable for security reasons, but a range of 1-5% would definitely be more helpful,” she noted.Italian government bonds, on the other hand, can make up 30% of total security assets. “From our point of view, this is much more risky than 1.5% in a special AIF,” she said.The catalogue does not include new forms of investment particularly relevant in the context of financing the transition to a green economy, including allocations in infrastructure, as standalone asset classes, but “as mixed share based on the investment vehicle chosen, and regardless of their character or degree of risk,” Stremlau explained.“The risk of loss is lower, especially when political programmes such as the Green New Deal support infrastructures projects,” she said.With a review of the investment ordinance, Stremlau continued, a higher number of Pensionskassen could invest in segments that lead to a transition to a sustainable economy, supporting public spending.Hannoversche Kassen considers the limit of up to 5% of the guaranteed assets for registered bonds (NSV) and promissory note loans (SSD) of non-listed companies “too strict”.“A range of 7.5-10% would make more sense,” she said, noting that the restriction has liquidity reasons, because registered bonds of non-listed companies would not be easy to sell if necessary.On the other hand, however, it may limit future participation of investors in a firm’s new environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) bond issuances if the share of allocation is exhausted.In the case of bearer bonds issued by listed companies, Hannoversche is “surprised” that the quota reaches a “generous” 50% of the guaranteed assets in total and 5% per issuer.To read the digital edition of IPE’s latest magazine click here.
The view from a waterfront home at Mermaid Beach.In Sunshine Beach in the Noosa Shire, house prices have increased by an average of $109,401 a year in the past five years — that’s significantly more than the annual median income of $69,680.Even in the blue chip suburb of New Farm in Brisbane, where households take home an annual wage of $93,704, property has earned more.Houses in the suburb have increased more than $500,000 in the past five years, according to RiskWise — that’s an average annual price rise of around $100,000. MEGA MANSION SELLS FOR $11M PLUS The property research group identified eight suburbs in Queensland where house price growth has outpaced household incomes over five years.The other suburbs are Surfers Paradise and Main Beach on the Gold Coast, and Minyama, Noosa Heads and Noosaville on the Sunshine Coast. RiskWise CEO Doron Peleg. Picture: Mike Batterham.Mr Peleg said demand from interstate migrants had helped pushed prices up in those suburbs, but they were still affordable compared with similar suburbs in New South Wales and Victoria.“With the exception of Main Beach, the rest of the suburbs have median prices of around $1.3/1.4 million, and if you compare those numbers to Sydney and Melbourne, the prices are still very cheap in comparison to the same suburbs,” he said.“When you compare apples with apples, what you pay for what you get is outstanding.” NSW CARPARK COSTS SAME AS QLD UNIT Thanks to an extra breadwinner in the family, Symone Wilson, Matthew Jarvis and their two sons are living the good life in the inner-city Brisbane suburb of New Farm.The extra breadwinner is their former family home — a beautiful house at 15 Oxlade Drive, New Farm, which Ms Wilson sold for $3.15 million in 2014.She paid just $442,000 for it in 2000.Ms Wilson and Mr Jarvis then bought a worker’s cottage at 87 James St, New Farm, which became a renovation project.More from newsParks and wildlife the new lust-haves post coronavirus17 hours agoNoosa’s best beachfront penthouse is about to hit the market17 hours agoThis house at 87 James St, New Farm, is for sale.The four-bedroom, three-bathroom house is on a corner block in the heart of the suburb and has been architecturally designed to accommodate dual living and a home office.It’s on the market for offers over $2.3 million.“We’ve lived in it for four years, but are selling because my mother and father are coming to live with us and we just need something bigger,” Ms Wilson said. Aerial view of the Gold Coast, from Mermaid Beach to Surfers Paradise. Picture: David Clark.RiskWise Property Research chief executive Doron Peleg said the fact the vast majority of the suburbs were beachside reflected a national trend of sea-change suburbs outperforming treechange suburbs. “We are seeing a combination of retirees, business owners and entrepreneurs and a significantly growing number of mobile professionals moving to these lifestyle locations,” Mr Peleg said.He said the suburbs were all considered “lucrative” in southeast Queensland, attracting high net worth individuals and a high socio-economic demographic. SEASIDE UNIT SELLS FOR RECORD PRICE They also outperformed in terms of capital growth, Mr Peleg said.“These suburbs form a league of their own in the sense that the prices are completely different and significantly higher than the median price in their regions,” he said.Greater Brisbane achieved capital growth of 25.7 per cent over five years, whereas these suburbs achieved much greater growth in that period. The view from the house at 87 James St, New Farm, which is for sale.She said they were looking for another home in New Farm because she wouldn’t live anywhere else.“You can’t go past the community feel in the suburb and the access to amenities,” she said.“There is a lot to offer.“That’s why a lot of people who live in New Farm say; ‘Don’t move out, you’ll never get back in!’” New Farm’s cafe scene makes it appealing to home buyers. Picture: Annette Dew.Ms Manning said there continued to be high demand from people wanting to live or invest in the area because of the projected capital growth.She said the suburb was also tightly held because of the amenities and lifestyle it provided, including access to New Farm Park, the river, the city, a variety of high end restaurants and boutique shopping and food outlets.“We deal with vendors who have owned properties for over 20 or 30 years and aren’t motivated to sell because their properties are rising in value exponentially every few years,” she said. “What we typically recommend to anyone wanting to invest in New Farm is; ‘Just get in, even if it’s at a higher entry level’, and then sit tight for a few years — the return on investment will come!” THE QLD SUBURBS WHERE YOUR HOUSE EARNS MORE THAN YOUSuburb Median House Price 5-Year Increase Median Income Annual Change Mermaid Beach $1,425,310 $603,511 $76,076 $120,702Sunshine Beach $1,358,168 $547,003 $69,680 $109,401New Farm $1,449,901 $506,514 $93,704 $101,303Surfers Paradise $1,328,028 $484,852 $59,072 $96,970Main Beach $1,776,647 $426,313 $79,768 $85,263Minyama $1,096,353 $391,724 $63,856 $78,345Noosa Heads $1,002,336 $374,446 $71,500 $74,889Noosaville $927,746 $312,083 $59,904 $62,417Source: RiskWise Property, CoreLogic, ABS Symone Wilson with her kids, Hugo, 14, and Jarvis, 11, at home in New Farm. Picture: Annette Dew.Listing agent Isabella Manning of Belle Property New Farm said the suburb’s phenomenal house price growth could be attributed to a lack of supply and strong demand.“There’s next to no new construction or land development in New Farm compared to other suburbs and its getting harder to find blocks that are subdividable,” she said.“Essentially, it comes down to limited/finite amount of stock.” Symone Wilson with her kids, Hugo, 14, and Jarvis, 11, at their home in New Farm. Picture: Annette Dew.HOUSES in some of Queensland’s most exclusive postcodes are earning tens of thousands of dollars a year more than their owners, with price gains in some suburbs easily exceeding take-home pay.Analysis by RiskWise Property Research, provided exclusively to The Courier-Mail, has found houses in Mermaid Beach on the Gold Coast have posted average annual increases of $120,702 over the past five years — without their owners having to lift a finger. GET THE LATEST REAL ESTATE NEWS DIRECT TO YOUR INBOX HERE That’s $44,600 more a year than the median annual household income in the suburb of $76,076.The average price of a house in the millionaire’s playground of Mermaid Beach is $1.425 million and apartments are around $420,000.