Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I love not renting, but opinions will vary. I'd generally much rather own something than pay for someone else to own. However, that's just based on my personal situation. There are scenarios where renting is a better option.
FWIW, I am in RE and own a PM and sales company.
we much rather use our landlords money to provide our housing while our own money is invested in far more lucrative things as opposed to tied up in a house
we much rather use our landlords money to provide our housing while our own money is invested in far more lucrative things as opposed to tied up in a house
So you're not using the landlords money to put a roof over your head. That's what I was getting at. None of the other stuff.
sure am . it’s his money that is tied up in this development…not mine …i pay him rent but my money is invested elsewhere…
if not for him , at this stage it would be my money tied up in a place.
i don’t have a dime invested in this apartment dead out of play.
like i said , switching pockets moving our invested dollars in to buying a place and having 450k doing nothing for us is silly . the fact its in equity doesn’t bring a thing to the party as far as the spending dollars , which is what counts at 71 for me
My point is not about how your money is allocated in investments. You are not using the landlords money to provide your housing. You are paying rent.
then you are not following .
his money is what is tied up in this building ….. he gets rent…that represents cash flow
i have no skin in the came other then to pay a monthly rent . he has millions committed to owning this building that he can’t get to without costly loans or invest elsewhere.
not only that but the new state rental laws put in effect destroyed his plan to see the building rents destabilized by hitting 2800 a month rent .
the new laws no longer allow the apartments to destabilize at a dollar figure so they got the rug pulled out from need them and now are stuck with a relatively low return forever on that money
his money is what is tied up in this building ….. he gets rent…that represents cash flow
i have no skin in the came other then to pay a monthly rent . he has millions committed to owning this building that he can’t get to without costly loans
Since you are an investor yourself, you would understand that people don't invest (financially) for free. Investment is for profit/worth. Your landlord is making a profit off of your rent. Period.
Since you are an investor yourself, you would understand that people don't invest (financially) for free. Investment is for profit/worth. Your landlord is making a profit off of your rent. Period.
he is making a lot less then we are …and the only reason we can make more is because of the fact he has his money invested in this building leaving all mine free for investing
the cap rate is not good on this building because with the new laws his hands are tied as far as getting rents up. his game plane was to get rents above 2800 so the apartments destabilized..
sure am . it’s his money that is tied up in this development…not mine …i pay him rent but my money is invested elsewhere…
if not for him , at this stage it would be my money tied up in a place.
i don’t have a dime invested in this apartment dead out of play.
like i said , switching pockets moving our invested dollars in to buying a place and having 450k doing nothing for us is silly . the fact its in equity doesn’t bring a thing to the party as far as the spending dollars , which is what counts at 71 for me
That is a very good strategy if you know, as you obviously do, how to invest successfully elsewhere.
So much depends on the tax system. Here the principal place of residence is capital gains tax free when it is sold and we do not have inheritance taxes. Encourages people to put extra money into their home, especially if they are not confident with investing elsewhere.
Also our renters have quite limited rights compared to other countries. Normally the longest lease is a year, there is no rent control once lease has expired, inspections are allowed in my state up to four times a year, very often no pets allowed etc. Again a big political issue at the moment.
But any moves to make renting more attractive to tenants will likely backfire as investors will pull out and leave even less rental properties on the market. Our little apartment would sell for over $1 million Australian dollars so our returns are only about 1.5% if we are lucky. Most of our tenants there would find it hard to buy something equivalent even if they want to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
