Models of mobility confirm the applicability of the disequilibrium (or adjustment) approach to residential change in Australia. Households who are younger move more often and family change precipitates residential change, and for longer distance moves being unemployed increases the probability of moving. The disruption of divorce and separation, as expected, increased the probability of moving. Measures of home, neighborhood and community satisfaction provide modest support for the relevance of place effects on the likelihood of mobility. The measures of neighborhood and community satisfaction are marginally significant and indicate that geography and place matter in the chance of moving. Place matters for both long and short distance moves and satisfaction with neighborhood as well as the house decreases the likelihood of a long distance move. The examination of reasons for moves and their translation into residential outcomes paints a positive picture for housing change but a less positive scenario for job opportunity satisfaction. I report evidence that supports the concept that we “move to improve”. A substantial proportion of movers, either maintain their locality status or improve their satisfaction with the move.