[eventusstultorummagister]

Feds Sue Hundreds of Las Vegas HOA's

http://www.8newsnow.com/story/177603...las-vegas-hoas

"Attorney's involved say more than 500 associations have been named"

"When it comes to penalties, an attorney connected to the case says all of those HOA's may be liable for up to $50 million"

[jfkIII]

Originally Posted by TheGreatCurve

Exactly. Throughout history (or at least the past 112 years), housing prices when adjusted for inflation have been essentially flat or falling downwards, except for the last huge bubble in the early 2000's. So when you buy a house, you're not really getting ahead of inflation nor making any "real" money in the long term.

Nice graph...but some seem to never want to accept that we're BACK to the norm and that the big line going downward...is known as "a correction".

[eventusstultorummagister]

New 20-story condo tower...

Work begins on new condo tower on Las Vegas Boulevard - www.ktnv.com

[LVPoker1]

The earnings on your down payment is lost. It's stuck in the house not making you any money.

Or I could have bought Blockbuster stock with it and lost everything, or Apple could get indicted by the feds for god knows that, or the value of the house could outperform the stock. That point is completely irrelevant. I already have a substantial amount invested in the market, but even if I did not, the fact you are predicting an individual stock will outperform home values is far more speculative than buying a single family residence as a primary. I have a feeling election time will not be kind to the stock market, but that is just the same speculation you are making.

Renter's insurance is not mandatory. When I've rented I've never had renter's insurance. Renter's insurance is only for the contents of your unit, i.e., your possessions. It does not insure the structure. Whereas, homeowners' insurance is mandatory if you have a mortgage.

For all realistic purposes, rental insurance is mandatory. All but one apartment I rented in my life required it to move in, and two of the three private landlords did too. Sure, it is technically a high variance bad bet, but so is any type of insurance. One takes a great risk of catastrophic proportions to save $200-$300 a year. As you note, a cash buyer does not have to have insurance either, which technically would be the right gambling move, but would seem like a bad non bet to make.

I guess some people think the market is going to collapse, or maybe made a bad bet on the housing market years ago and are bitter. If you feel so strongly that anyone here for several years is better to rent than buy is a massive pessimist. If rents do not go up at all, after 4 years I will have saved nearly $30,000 just in cash on a 15 year mortgage, and it would be about $45k-$50k on a 30 year. That does not include the equity in my home, which would be about $40-$50k. This means the home would have to lose over 40% of its value in 4 years for me to lose. The house will not go to $0, so no matter how bad things are, I will have a home free and clear after 15 years while the renter has tossed away $300,000 with nothing to show for it.

To the antis, how long would someone have to stay in their home to advocate buying over renting? It seems you guys are just 100% anti buying a house no matter what. There must be some personal reason why you are giving such advice. Is there really no scenario where buying is better over renting, even when rents are double what a 30 year mortgage would be?

The people arguing renting makes more sense must really think the city is going to be blowing tumbleweeds in a few years. All economic indicators prove otherwise.

[logline]

Originally Posted by eventusstultorummagister

New 20-story condo tower...

Work begins on new condo tower on Las Vegas Boulevard - www.ktnv.com

That's a very old news report. The Grandview is already built. It's right next to South Point.

[LVPoker1]

[mod cut-- deleted post quote, and response]

Let's look at how major companies in Las Vegas are doing that are based here:

Earnings up 26.5 percent at Las Vegas-based Allegiant Travel - VEGAS INC

Las Vegas Sands sees big jump in casino winnings at Strip properties - VEGAS INC

Bally Tech Bets Pop Icon-Themed Equipment Will Make It The King Of Slots BYI LVS BYD IGT - Investors.com

IGT 2Q beats Street, raises annual profit view - Yahoo! Finance

Most other gaming companies are doing well too, but their earnings reports are not as recent as the last few days like these others are.

Note that all of these state or imply Las Vegas increased income, even on top of the incredible gains in Macau. In case you believe that is crap, McCarran had its 2nd largest passenger volume ever in 2011:

Las Vegas Reports 2011 Produced Second Highest Visitor Count

Unemployment is not down substantially, but if these gains in tourism continue, they will follow. It will never be like it was, but the current climate is certainly sustainable.

[TheGreatCurve]

[mod cut-- off topic]

Originally Posted by LVPoker1

For all realistic purposes, rental insurance is mandatory. All but one apartment I rented in my life required it to move in, and two of the three private landlords did too. Sure, it is technically a high variance bad bet, but so is any type of insurance. One takes a great risk of catastrophic proportions to save $200-$300 a year. As you note, a cash buyer does not have to have insurance either, which technically would be the right gambling move, but would seem like a bad non bet to make.

Not at all. Like I said, rental insurance does not cover the structure but only your possessions inside. If you don't own anything of much value or you wouldn't mind even if it was stolen, then why get rental insurance? Even if you pay cash to buy a house, you'd still want homeowner's insurance because it covers the structure against calamity and also liability in case you get sued. If your house burns down, you'd better have homeowner's insurance.

Originally Posted by LVPoker1

The house will not go to $0, so no matter how bad things are,

I don't know but have you been to Detroit? There are houses there that people won't take even if the seller paid them to take it.

[LVPoker1]

I don't know but have you been to Detroit? There are houses there that people won't take even if the seller paid them to take it.

Yes, I have a lot of family there. It is hard to have a worthy discussion with someone that compares buying a 5 bedroom house in Summerlin to dilapidated homes built in the 50's in an abandoned urban core. Not every house in Detroit is worth $0, and the homes in the comparable suburbs of Detroit are doing just fine.

You also do not seem to understand that most landlords require renter's insurance for their tenants. I have been told there are certain loans or insurance that require it. I am not an expert there, I just know that it has been a requirement for most every property I have rented over the years.

[airics]

Originally Posted by TheGreatCurve

Not at all. Like I said, rental insurance does not cover the structure but only your possessions inside. If you don't own anything of much value or you wouldn't mind even if it was stolen, then why get rental insurance? Even if you pay cash to buy a house, you'd still want homeowner's insurance because it covers the structure against calamity and also liability in case you get sued. If your house burns down, you'd better have homeowner's insurance.


I don't know but have you been to Detroit? There are houses there that people won't take even if the seller paid them to take it.

Because its required if the landlord is using a standard glvar lease. I require it from my tenants

[TheGreatCurve]

Originally Posted by LVPoker1

. Let's look at how major companies in Las Vegas are doing that are based here:

These 3 numbers are all you really need to predict Las Vegas' future as a gaming capital:

Revenue sources for Sands Las Vegas:

Macau: $1.45 billion
Singapore: 701.3 million
Las Vegas: 158.7 million

Sands is also looking to expand into Spain, Korea, Japan, Vietnam and Taiwan.

Las Vegas Sands Corp. 1Q profit jumps - Yahoo! News