Staying at least 5 years or rent it out... (investment, condos, landlord)

[pannierpacker]

Hi everyone,
I've heard the rule before that it doesn't make sense to buy a home if you don't have any intention of staying there at least 5 years, due to the financial costs to acquire/sell the home in the first place. Doesn't this argument sort of fly out the window if you later use the property as an investment property though? I'm looking at 1 BR condos, but honestly I'm young, single, and have no idea what my 5 year plans are. I'd rather have some flexibility.

[GoPhils]

I think when people say "staying" they more refer to "selling." So if you're not planning to sell it, then no I'd say the "rule" doesn't really apply.

But depending on the market, keep in mind that condos don't always show a lot of appreciation. I would assume if you're thinking about renting it out later that you've looked into what you might be able to get in rent vs what it would cost you.

[MrRational]

Originally Posted by pannierpacker

...if you later use the property as an investment property though? I'm looking at 1 BR condos

Beyond the time aspect the specific type of property matters as well.
A small 2 or 3 BR house without HOA or condo association issues makes a better rental.
Then there's the price paid. Buy valued as an investment property not as home for yourself.

I'm young, single, and have no idea what my 5 year plans are.
I'd rather have some flexibility.

Do you at least want/prefer/intend to remain in that city for longer than 5 years?
You don't want to be a long distance landlord either.