Pace Private Wealth

31/03/2026

This is our second year sponsoring Phoenix Netball Club Townsville Inc. and we are proud to be associated with a local club that gives so much to its members - Go Phoenix 💚💙

30/03/2026

Whilst every situation is different our view remains consistent in that investors should look through short term volatility, think long term and remain patient.

22/02/2026

I read an interesting article by Noel Whittaker on the weekend about one of the biggest retirement decisions you and your family can make, which I've captured below. If it doesn't apply to you right now, think about your parents' situation. It's worth considering...

It’s almost inevitable that at some point you – or your partner, if you’re in a couple – will need care. Is your home one where that care can be provided? That became very real for me two years ago when I broke my ankle and discovered it was impossible to live in our present home without making some modifications.

That line of thinking leads straight to the next big question. Do you expect to live in your current home for the rest of your life, perhaps with some changes along the way, or do you plan to move? And if you do move, where to?

Moving to an exotic location may sound like paradise, but I recommend that anyone thinking of doing this rent first in the area they think they may live — ideally for 12 months, but at least for six months. It gives you time to experience the environment and, just as importantly, to see what sort of social network you are realistically likely to build. It’s a simple step that can save you from making a very expensive mistake.

If you move, will your next home be an apartment, a smaller house or townhouse, or some form of retirement village accommodation? For most people, I think the most appropriate option is a retirement village. There’s a wealth of research showing that a happy and healthy retirement depends on a good diet, regular exercise, a sense of purpose, and a strong social network. A good retirement village can provide all of those.

I always tell audiences about Harry and Margaret, who retired to the Sunshine Coast. Harry kept himself busy doing casual work as a handyman, while Margaret played golf. Life was very good. But after a few years it all became a bit too much, so they moved into a retirement village in the Sunshine Coast hinterland.

Harry loved it – especially the daily happy hour, where he would sit with Margaret and five widows from the village, enjoying good conversation and a few glasses of wine. They called it Harry’s harem.

Time passed, and then life took an unexpected turn. Harry died, fairly suddenly.

But here’s the important part. If they’d been living in an apartment where they knew hardly anyone, Margaret’s world would have shrunk overnight. Instead, her life in the village carried on. The same people were there, the same routines, the same support – exactly when she needed it most. That’s the real value of a social network, and it’s something many people underestimate the value of when they’re planning for retirement. There’s plenty more to say about retirement villages – the good, the bad and the expensive – but that’s a conversation for another column.

The next big issue for anyone planning retirement and the home for this phase of life is how to fund it. Ideally, you want to retire mortgage-free. If you’re still working, you should be using every option available to boost your super, so there’s at least enough money there to deal with any mortgage debt when you retire.

I’m often asked whether people should focus on paying off the mortgage or boosting their super. Making tax-deductible contributions is usually a no-brainer, because they come from pre-tax dollars, whereas mortgage repayments are made from after-tax income. On top of that, a good super fund should be earning a higher return than the interest you’re paying on your mortgage. And remember, if you have sufficient super, you don’t necessarily need to eliminate the debt as soon as you retire – you can draw enough from super to pay the interest while the remaining super balance continues to compound.

The other critical factor is time. If you’re 60, earning $100,000 a year and have $500,000 in super, that’s all you’ll have when you retire — and you’ll still be seven years short of qualifying for the age pension. Working for five more years could lift your super balance to around $800,000. There are also strategies such as transition-to-retirement pensions, which allow you to access part of your super once you turn 60 while continuing to work, often on reduced hours.

The key point is this: the more you get into your super, and the longer you can delay drawing on it, the more you’ll have when you eventually need it.

Where you live and how you pay for it are two of the biggest issues facing any retiree. Do yourself a favour, and think about the things that you, like almost everybody else, are likely to face.

Noel Whittaker - The Courier Mail

Send a message to learn more

27/01/2026

We are so proud of Jo and the tireless work she does to support the Charters Towers community through Our Town Association. Her recognition as Citizen of the Year is well deserved. Congratulations Jo!

20/01/2026

Using your super to buy property? Here is why it could cost you millions!

We are often asked about investing in property and Noel Whittaker wrote an article in the paper on the weekend, warning that property spruikers are targeting superannuation holders with risky investment schemes that could destroy retirement dreams.

Please take a few minutes to read his article, which I have included below and if you'd like to chat further, please reach out to us.

Every few weeks an email arrives from someone excited — or uneasy — about a pitch to build wealth through an investment property.

The salesperson talks confidently about long-term growth and passive income. With today’s prices, most people can’t imagine buying an investment property, but the spruikers have a solution: start a self-managed super fund, roll in your existing super, buy the property inside it, and suddenly the deal is “affordable”.

One recent email was typical. He was 52 with $300,000 in super; she was 45 with $400,000. They earned around $120,000 each and owned their home outright. The advice they were given was to roll their entire super into an SMSF and buy a property. I told them the two jewels in their crown were their home and their super — and neither should be put at risk.

I ran the numbers using the Super Contributions Calculator on my website. If they simply stayed the course and kept contributing, he would have about $1.2 million at 65 and she around $2.7 million. By letting super do its job instead of trying to pick winners in the property market, they could retire with close to $4 million — without the leverage, complexity and stress that come with property.

But the old question — which is better, property or shares? — always sparks debate. I’ve compared the two for decades and, while both have their place, the differences are stark.

Start with entry and exit costs. With shares, they are minimal. You can buy or sell with a click and pay modest brokerage. Property is expensive from the outset: stamp duty, legal fees, inspections and borrowing costs all add up. When you sell, agent’s commissions and advertising can run into tens of thousands of dollars.

Then there’s flexibility. Shares are liquid. If I have $1 million in shares and need $100,000, I can sell part of my portfolio and have the cash within days. Property doesn’t work that way. You can’t sell the back bedroom. To get money out, you must borrow or sell the whole asset, triggering CGT and hefty transaction costs.

Income is another major difference. Dividends from Australian shares often come with franking credits, which are tax-free for people earning less than $135,000 a year. Rent, by contrast, is taxed at your full marginal rate and, after expenses, the net yield is often underwhelming. Negative gearing helps while you’re working, but it does little once you retire.

The cost difference doesn’t stop at the purchase price. Shares can be held for decades at negligible cost. Property comes with an unavoidable stream of holding costs — interest, land tax, council rates, insurance, maintenance, repairs and vacancies — that quietly but relentlessly eat into returns.

Growth is not as straightforward as people imagine. The key to strong capital gains in property is buying well and adding value. You can’t do that with apartments — they simply age. That leaves freestanding houses, where bargains are scarce and competition fierce. Shares may be volatile in the short term, but over long periods the trend has been remarkably consistent, provided you are not forced to sell in a downturn.

The regulatory climate is also shifting against landlords. In many states, bashing landlords wins votes. We now have rent freezes, limits on increases and rules forcing owners to accept “reasonable requests”, including pets or extra occupants. Each change reduces flexibility and pushes costs higher.

Diversification highlights the contrast. With property, success depends on choosing the right location, builder and tenant — and hoping nothing goes wrong. With shares, diversification is easy. A single index fund such as ASX. STW gives exposure to the 200 largest Australian companies. History shows the share market has delivered average returns of around 9 per cent a year for more than a century.

Of course, both have their place. Property offers the comfort of something tangible, and borrowing can magnify returns — or losses. Shares offer liquidity, diversification and ease of management. The claim that property is inherently “safer” does not stand up to scrutiny.

The long-term numbers tell a clear story. Over the last 25 years, average property growth has varied by city, with Adelaide and Brisbane leading at 7.9 per cent per annum. By contrast, the All Ordinaries Accumulation Index has averaged 8.74 per cent per annum, including income and growth.

I acknowledge that the property figures ignore rental income, but they also ignore the real costs that sit on either side of ownership. When you buy, there is stamp duty, legal fees, inspections and loan costs. When you sell, there are agent’s commissions, advertising and legal fees. In between is a never-ending stream of holding costs which, over decades, can materially erode returns.

Share market figures, by contrast, already include income, yet still understate the case. They do not capture the added value of franking credits for Australian investors, nor the powerful benefit of instant liquidity — the ability to sell part or all of your investment at any time, at low cost, without disrupting the rest of your portfolio.

My formula for long-term success has not changed in 50 years: make buying a home your first goal and, once the mortgage is under control, diversify into shares. It’s simple, and it works.

- Noel Whittaker - The Australian Business Network

11/12/2025

To all of our valued clients and business associates, we would like to wish you all a very Merry Christmas and we look forward to continuing to work with you in 2026!