10% Rule
- Thread starter AminMurji
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,733
Very good numbers !!!
Utilities included or tenants pay all utilities?
Any $$$ needed in initial reno's?
Deferred maintenance?
I'm assuming this is a multi-unit property for $275K not a house that rents for $2450? or?
[quote user=wgraham] The last house I bought was $275k that brings in rent of $2450.....I would say that is pretty close. So yes 10% is possible in Edm.
Utilities included or tenants pay all utilities?
Any $$$ needed in initial reno's?
Deferred maintenance?
I'm assuming this is a multi-unit property for $275K not a house that rents for $2450? or?
[quote user=wgraham] The last house I bought was $275k that brings in rent of $2450.....I would say that is pretty close. So yes 10% is possible in Edm.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,733
Hi Michael
I think you have been left with the wrong impression from reading my posts.....I'm happy to be inspired by good deals - but the truth is to comment on what you've wrote most examples I've seen on "how it could be done" do not show the whole picture... such as:
Stability of revenue source.... Can you keep it filled month after month, year after year, at that rent? Are all units legal?
Can you consistently collect rent from the tenant profile of the building?
Was there initial cash used to renovate the property? A reno project that you hold long term can be a great deal but often you're adding value from doing so - so compensation for your cash + risk + time overseeing - so purchase price of property after reno'd condition would not allow as good rent to purchase price numbers - not apples to apples.....
Is this net of utilities? Most posts I've seen have not been... $2000 a month rent is different than $2000 a month rent less $600 a month utilities......
Are many items near the end of there life span and money will need to be put into the property soon - effectively raising the purchase price for any meaningful ratio....
[quote user=bizaro86][quote user=wgraham] The last house I bought was $275k that brings in rent of $2450.....I would say that is pretty close. So yes 10% is possible in Edm.
This exceeds the 10% rule. 2450/month *12 months= $29,400 per year x10 = 294,000 > 275000
Of course, it's easier to say something can't be done with a one-liner than to refute specific examples of how it can be done...
Regards,
Michael
I think you have been left with the wrong impression from reading my posts.....I'm happy to be inspired by good deals - but the truth is to comment on what you've wrote most examples I've seen on "how it could be done" do not show the whole picture... such as:
Stability of revenue source.... Can you keep it filled month after month, year after year, at that rent? Are all units legal?
Can you consistently collect rent from the tenant profile of the building?
Was there initial cash used to renovate the property? A reno project that you hold long term can be a great deal but often you're adding value from doing so - so compensation for your cash + risk + time overseeing - so purchase price of property after reno'd condition would not allow as good rent to purchase price numbers - not apples to apples.....
Is this net of utilities? Most posts I've seen have not been... $2000 a month rent is different than $2000 a month rent less $600 a month utilities......
Are many items near the end of there life span and money will need to be put into the property soon - effectively raising the purchase price for any meaningful ratio....
[quote user=bizaro86][quote user=wgraham] The last house I bought was $275k that brings in rent of $2450.....I would say that is pretty close. So yes 10% is possible in Edm.
This exceeds the 10% rule. 2450/month *12 months= $29,400 per year x10 = 294,000 > 275000
Of course, it's easier to say something can't be done with a one-liner than to refute specific examples of how it can be done...
Regards,
Michael
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2007
- Messages
- 2,042
[quote user=johnsu]My 2 cents is that you be comfortable managing the fluctuations in cashflow. Residential properties make the money on the appreciation. Cash Flow is very minimal money made and typically vacancies, damage act will eat up your cashflow pretty quick and easy. I'm not saying buy negative cash flow but be aware the real money in residential is made via market appreciation. So my suggestion is be comfortable with the cash flow after you run the numbers but a rough filter like 10% in my opinion is not the best tool to make the most of residential properties. Look at the dollar amounts cause that's what's coming into/out of your pocket!
Investors for the most part can not sustain a rental property without positive cash flow. In reality if you have purchased a property where in the expenses you site eat up cash flow and you are depending on making "real money" via market appreciation that would make you a speculator as opposed to a investor.
Investors expect positive cash flow and in fact by definition a investor is someone that receives a regular return on there money. A speculator on the other hand is depending on a uncertain return that can only be at best a guess based on previous results.
I know it's a fine line and many like to throw appreciation into the mix of investing, but again, by definition depending on appreciation is not investing.
Investors for the most part can not sustain a rental property without positive cash flow. In reality if you have purchased a property where in the expenses you site eat up cash flow and you are depending on making "real money" via market appreciation that would make you a speculator as opposed to a investor.
Investors expect positive cash flow and in fact by definition a investor is someone that receives a regular return on there money. A speculator on the other hand is depending on a uncertain return that can only be at best a guess based on previous results.
I know it's a fine line and many like to throw appreciation into the mix of investing, but again, by definition depending on appreciation is not investing.
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2007
- Messages
- 13,881
[quote user=invst4profit]depending on appreciation is not investing.
It is not ?
Why buy stocks or gold then ? Many stocks don't pay dividends .. and gold doesn't either .. and for many it has been a great investment, too !
It is the combination of cash-flow, mortgage paydown, deferrerd taxes, mortgageability at low rates and appreciation that makes real estate such a great investment. Cash-flow is desired, of course, but only one element of the investment.
It is not ?
Why buy stocks or gold then ? Many stocks don't pay dividends .. and gold doesn't either .. and for many it has been a great investment, too !
It is the combination of cash-flow, mortgage paydown, deferrerd taxes, mortgageability at low rates and appreciation that makes real estate such a great investment. Cash-flow is desired, of course, but only one element of the investment.
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2007
- Messages
- 1,230
[quote user=ThomasBeyer]It is the combination of cash-flow, mortgage paydown, deferrerd taxes, mortgageability at low rates and appreciation that makes real estate such a great investment. Cash-flow is desired, of course, but only one element of the investment.
So true, but for example one of the first realtors I (tried) working with claimed that he only had to invest for appreciation since the market went up an average of 8% per yr (this was 2007) and even if his properties had some negative cflow that was good b/c he could write it off on his taxes.
My question is WHAT goes on in someone's mind to make them think that losing money is a good idea???
Why do you think me with an employment income of $30K has 8 properties and he with an employment income of $170K has 2?
I get Thomas' point and totally agree as to that being why RE is such a great investment but doesn't matter what you buy if it has to go up in value to make money it is not an investment in my mind - it is speculation.
Gold will not go up forever, check back with me the day after I buy some
So true, but for example one of the first realtors I (tried) working with claimed that he only had to invest for appreciation since the market went up an average of 8% per yr (this was 2007) and even if his properties had some negative cflow that was good b/c he could write it off on his taxes.
My question is WHAT goes on in someone's mind to make them think that losing money is a good idea???
Why do you think me with an employment income of $30K has 8 properties and he with an employment income of $170K has 2?
I get Thomas' point and totally agree as to that being why RE is such a great investment but doesn't matter what you buy if it has to go up in value to make money it is not an investment in my mind - it is speculation.
Gold will not go up forever, check back with me the day after I buy some
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2008
- Messages
- 1,025
[quote user=housingrental]I think you have been left with the wrong impression from reading my posts
I think maybe you're not following the conversation then. We were talking about the 10% rule, a first filter suggesting that you look for properties with a gross rent of 10% of the purchase price. You then made a 1-line post saying that properties like that couldn't be found in Edmonton.
My prior post had an example of one property that met that criteria, along with a disclaimer that there is a wide variety of reasons a property that meets the 10% rule might not be a good investment, and that it's only a filter.
So you can't credibly say that there aren't properties that meet the 10% filter, since we've had numerous examples throughout the thread. Then, you gave a bunch of examples of why a 10% property might not be a good investment. But we had that discussion already as well. So saying that a 10% property might not be a good investment doesn't reflect the discussion.
The 10% filter isn't a rule that automatically says something is a good investment, it's just a way of filtering. Ultimately, you have to filter somehow, or you'll spend time looking at gold and oil/gas and condos in phoenix and student housing in Waterloo and mortgage REITs etc...
Regards,
Michael
I think maybe you're not following the conversation then. We were talking about the 10% rule, a first filter suggesting that you look for properties with a gross rent of 10% of the purchase price. You then made a 1-line post saying that properties like that couldn't be found in Edmonton.
My prior post had an example of one property that met that criteria, along with a disclaimer that there is a wide variety of reasons a property that meets the 10% rule might not be a good investment, and that it's only a filter.
So you can't credibly say that there aren't properties that meet the 10% filter, since we've had numerous examples throughout the thread. Then, you gave a bunch of examples of why a 10% property might not be a good investment. But we had that discussion already as well. So saying that a 10% property might not be a good investment doesn't reflect the discussion.
The 10% filter isn't a rule that automatically says something is a good investment, it's just a way of filtering. Ultimately, you have to filter somehow, or you'll spend time looking at gold and oil/gas and condos in phoenix and student housing in Waterloo and mortgage REITs etc...
Regards,
Michael
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2007
- Messages
- 13,881
[quote user=EdRenkema]why RE is such a great investment but doesn't matter what you buy if it has to go up in value to make money it is not an investment in my mind - it is speculation.
Gold will not go up forever,
So everyone that buys stocks or gold is a speculator ? One could argue, if one believes in democracy, and hence the associated public debt promised by politicians and thus inflation, that gold or stocks WILL GO UP FOREVER, on average. Just look at a 50 year gold or stock chart. It is a line that slopes upward (with dips along the line, of course) !!
Of course, to hold a property for 5 or more years one must have cash-flow to hold it .. or enough cash to cover the odd time with negative cash-flow !
However, I know plenty of people, for example here in Vancouver that buy pre-sale condos @ a $100,000 to $150,000 discount to market .. say for $550,000 with a target price of $700,000 with 10% (or $55,000 down) and the purchase is 2-3 years out. Assuming even a flat market, and some cash to hold property vacant for a year after it finishes can be a great investment. Is it risky: yes it is.
Other people build condos or develop raw land into residential lots and make millions ! Are they bad investors .. or speculators even ? Some are .. but many do know what they are doing.
Cash-flowing property is just one example of how to make money in real estate. There are others.
Gold will not go up forever,
So everyone that buys stocks or gold is a speculator ? One could argue, if one believes in democracy, and hence the associated public debt promised by politicians and thus inflation, that gold or stocks WILL GO UP FOREVER, on average. Just look at a 50 year gold or stock chart. It is a line that slopes upward (with dips along the line, of course) !!
Of course, to hold a property for 5 or more years one must have cash-flow to hold it .. or enough cash to cover the odd time with negative cash-flow !
However, I know plenty of people, for example here in Vancouver that buy pre-sale condos @ a $100,000 to $150,000 discount to market .. say for $550,000 with a target price of $700,000 with 10% (or $55,000 down) and the purchase is 2-3 years out. Assuming even a flat market, and some cash to hold property vacant for a year after it finishes can be a great investment. Is it risky: yes it is.
Other people build condos or develop raw land into residential lots and make millions ! Are they bad investors .. or speculators even ? Some are .. but many do know what they are doing.
Cash-flowing property is just one example of how to make money in real estate. There are others.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2007
- Messages
- 1,191
[quote user=ThomasBeyer][quote user=EdRenkema]why RE is such a great investment but doesn't matter what you buy if it has to go up in value to make money it is not an investment in my mind - it is speculation.
Gold will not go up forever,
So everyone that buys stocks or gold is a speculator ? One could argue, if one believes in democracy, and hence the associated public debt promised by politicians and thus inflation, that gold or stocks WILL GO UP FOREVER, on average. Just look at a 50 year gold or stock chart. It is a line that slopes upward (with dips along the line, of course) !!
My 2 cts on investing versus speculating. I am mostly in Thomas' camp. You don't have to get cashflow and you could count on a value increase in the future based on various factors as an investor. Most people equate the term speculator with a 'high risk' investor or gambler. This is too simplistic.
An "angel investor' puts often large amounts of money in start-up companies but is not necessarily a 'speculator'. The angel investor expects 3 out of 10 investments to work out and hopes those 3 investments to be thus profitable that it exceeds the potential losses in the other 7 and still delivers a good overall portfolio return. He/she may work closely with the start-ups involved, either as an advisor, board member and in extreme cases even on staff. Experience has taught the angel investor that he has a good chance of making a good return and he will help his fellow entrepreneurs achieving success.
In what is this so different than investing in real estate? We aim to break even on cash flow or somewhat better and cash-in 5 years down the road on mortgage paydown and appreciation! The real estate investor works hard and hopes to provide affordable decent housing for his fellow humans. So why call the real estate guy an investor and the angel investor a speculator?
The real difference is risk. Speculators are considered to take big risks without a sound reasoning behind it. They churn investments regardless of supply and demand purely for 'scoring' big. But who defines that risk?
Is it business risk, operating risk, inflation risk? Who defines how much risk represents investing and how much is considered speculation? It is all in the eyes of the beholder! Also, the risk/reward issue is highly debatable since for one investor the return may be only achieved in monetary form, while another may also count the 'social rewards' or whatever other benefits sprout from the investment.
I think, here at REIN we're walking around a bit self-righteous when considering ourselves investors and considering stock market investors or gold investors as less: 'just speculators'. Widen your horizon and don't call other forms of investing "speculating" just because it doesn't fit your business modell.
Gold will not go up forever,
So everyone that buys stocks or gold is a speculator ? One could argue, if one believes in democracy, and hence the associated public debt promised by politicians and thus inflation, that gold or stocks WILL GO UP FOREVER, on average. Just look at a 50 year gold or stock chart. It is a line that slopes upward (with dips along the line, of course) !!
My 2 cts on investing versus speculating. I am mostly in Thomas' camp. You don't have to get cashflow and you could count on a value increase in the future based on various factors as an investor. Most people equate the term speculator with a 'high risk' investor or gambler. This is too simplistic.
An "angel investor' puts often large amounts of money in start-up companies but is not necessarily a 'speculator'. The angel investor expects 3 out of 10 investments to work out and hopes those 3 investments to be thus profitable that it exceeds the potential losses in the other 7 and still delivers a good overall portfolio return. He/she may work closely with the start-ups involved, either as an advisor, board member and in extreme cases even on staff. Experience has taught the angel investor that he has a good chance of making a good return and he will help his fellow entrepreneurs achieving success.
In what is this so different than investing in real estate? We aim to break even on cash flow or somewhat better and cash-in 5 years down the road on mortgage paydown and appreciation! The real estate investor works hard and hopes to provide affordable decent housing for his fellow humans. So why call the real estate guy an investor and the angel investor a speculator?
The real difference is risk. Speculators are considered to take big risks without a sound reasoning behind it. They churn investments regardless of supply and demand purely for 'scoring' big. But who defines that risk?
Is it business risk, operating risk, inflation risk? Who defines how much risk represents investing and how much is considered speculation? It is all in the eyes of the beholder! Also, the risk/reward issue is highly debatable since for one investor the return may be only achieved in monetary form, while another may also count the 'social rewards' or whatever other benefits sprout from the investment.
I think, here at REIN we're walking around a bit self-righteous when considering ourselves investors and considering stock market investors or gold investors as less: 'just speculators'. Widen your horizon and don't call other forms of investing "speculating" just because it doesn't fit your business modell.
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2007
- Messages
- 196
[quote user=invst4profit]Investors for the most part can not sustain a rental property without positive cash flow. In reality if you have purchased a property where in the expenses you site eat up cash flow and you are depending on making "real money" via market appreciation that would make you a speculator as opposed to a investor.
Investors expect positive cash flow and in fact by definition a investor is someone that receives a regular return on there money. A speculator on the other hand is depending on a uncertain return that can only be at best a guess based on previous results.
I know it's a fine line and many like to throw appreciation into the mix of investing, but again, by definition depending on appreciation is not investing.
Maybe I should tighten up my statement about appreciation. Don't invest ONLY based on appreciation. What I was referring to was the REALITY of Residential real estate that the "Real money" is literally made on appreciation and NOT the cashflow. Of course I'd be buying positive cashflow because you got to be able to hold for 5 years and negative cashflow doesn't fit building a "portfolio" strategy but does work for other people who are ok with negative cashflow.
ALL investing is SPECULATION unless you can read the future. To be effective at investing has a direct relation to one's ability to MANAGE RISK! Manage risk effectively and the result of your investment has a better chance at being successful.
Investors expect positive cash flow and in fact by definition a investor is someone that receives a regular return on there money. A speculator on the other hand is depending on a uncertain return that can only be at best a guess based on previous results.
I know it's a fine line and many like to throw appreciation into the mix of investing, but again, by definition depending on appreciation is not investing.
Maybe I should tighten up my statement about appreciation. Don't invest ONLY based on appreciation. What I was referring to was the REALITY of Residential real estate that the "Real money" is literally made on appreciation and NOT the cashflow. Of course I'd be buying positive cashflow because you got to be able to hold for 5 years and negative cashflow doesn't fit building a "portfolio" strategy but does work for other people who are ok with negative cashflow.
ALL investing is SPECULATION unless you can read the future. To be effective at investing has a direct relation to one's ability to MANAGE RISK! Manage risk effectively and the result of your investment has a better chance at being successful.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2007
- Messages
- 2,042
Why is it investors on here, like yourself Thomas, shy away from the topic of speculation. It's part of the business and yet for some reason the topic is poo pooed. Is it possibly the fear of scaring away other investors?
I know you are not afraid but at the same time you do not want to openly admit and separate investing from speculating.
Speculation is what it is and is part of buying real estate. It's the potential desert at the end of the meal. Is it guaranteed ,no, ask anyone that sold in 2009.
Is your rental income guaranteed, no, but rental income is mush more easily anticipated than appreciation.
Investing is a financial operation that upon thorough analysis promises safety of principal and a satisfactory return.
Speculation is a financial operation associated with higher risk of potential profits based on the hope of upward price movement.
Are they mutually exclusive, no, but definitely different animals.
For all you big time "investors" out there take a deep breath and say to yourself " it's OK to admit I speculate".
I know you are not afraid but at the same time you do not want to openly admit and separate investing from speculating.
Speculation is what it is and is part of buying real estate. It's the potential desert at the end of the meal. Is it guaranteed ,no, ask anyone that sold in 2009.
Is your rental income guaranteed, no, but rental income is mush more easily anticipated than appreciation.
Investing is a financial operation that upon thorough analysis promises safety of principal and a satisfactory return.
Speculation is a financial operation associated with higher risk of potential profits based on the hope of upward price movement.
Are they mutually exclusive, no, but definitely different animals.
For all you big time "investors" out there take a deep breath and say to yourself " it's OK to admit I speculate".
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2007
- Messages
- 1,230
[quote user=ThomasBeyer]So everyone that buys stocks or gold is a speculator ?
False logic, if John's dog is brown and has fleas then does Jane's dog have fleas b/c it is brown??
Gold is a good hedge against inflation, especially since the early 70s when Nixon changed the game of money.
I've been an active investor in cashflowing RE since 2007, there is no question in my mind that I am and will do incredibly better doing that rather than buying gold. I don't have to go into detail, I'll leave that to the bean counters and techies out there (where is Godfried Wasser
My point is a rental property is a small business, one does not buy & run a business to create appreciation value, a business is run on cash flow. I could not have started from virtually nothing by buying gold or stocks for that matter (especially not me)
False logic, if John's dog is brown and has fleas then does Jane's dog have fleas b/c it is brown??
Gold is a good hedge against inflation, especially since the early 70s when Nixon changed the game of money.
I've been an active investor in cashflowing RE since 2007, there is no question in my mind that I am and will do incredibly better doing that rather than buying gold. I don't have to go into detail, I'll leave that to the bean counters and techies out there (where is Godfried Wasser
My point is a rental property is a small business, one does not buy & run a business to create appreciation value, a business is run on cash flow. I could not have started from virtually nothing by buying gold or stocks for that matter (especially not me)
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2007
- Messages
- 1,230
[quote user=invst4profit]Investing is a financial operation that upon thorough analysis promises safety of principal and a satisfactory return.
Speculation is a financial operation associated with higher risk of potential profits based on the hope of upward price movement.
Well said!
Speculation is a financial operation associated with higher risk of potential profits based on the hope of upward price movement.
Well said!
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2007
- Messages
- 1,191
[quote user=EdRenkema]I've been an active investor in cashflowing RE since 2007, there is no question in my mind that I am and will do incredibly better doing that rather than buying gold. I don't have to go into detail, I'll leave that to the bean counters and techies out there (where is Godfried Wasser
My point is a rental property is a small business, one does not buy & run a business to create appreciation value, a business is run on cash flow. I could not have started from virtually nothing by buying gold or stocks for that matter (especially not me)
First of all, I do analyze investment concepts to better understand what I am doing. As such, trying define risk or the difference between 'speculation and investing' is essential. Without going into details, I can assure you that I am far from only a 'theoretical investor' although I like to count my beans
Secondly, it is nonsense to state that one does not run a business to create appreciation value. We create a business to make money and nobody cares too much about whether the profits are due to appreciation or due to positive cash flow. That is pretty 'practical' I would say.
I agree with Jhonsu that when buying units, one at a time, it is tough to make your profits only from cashflow. Even if positive, the bulk of the profits is often from leveraged appreciation and mortgage paydown. It is fine with me, if you only consider your positive cashflow as profit. If you don't want the rest, then feel free to forward it to me
This discussion is not necessarily about 'speculation vs investment' it is about risk and risk management. In those terms, appreciation of real estate is over the longterm as close to a given as you can get in the investment world - just as it is with stocks. What is less certain is how much appreciation - is it 3%, 4% or 6% per year? Long term appreciation charts may give you an idea about your area's historical performance. (scenario 1)
If you buy a condo or house that has still to be build and you use a small down payment and high leverage; your risk level would be high. If you intend to sell right upon completion of construction withing in one or 2 years then the risk of not getting value appreciation is likely very high. To top it off, if you have no cash flow as with a normal rental property your risk may become excessive. So what are the chances of making money here in the end? 1 in 2 or 1 in 10? Or does it approach the odds of winning in the lottery? (scenario 2).
Most people would consider the second scenario extremely risky and 'speculative', while most investors would consider the first scenario as a well thought out investment. So in my opinion, speculation has nothing to do with the source of your profits but more with the odds of making money (or at least recovering your initial investment). Where to place the boundary between investing and speculation remains to be seen. Personally, I would think odds of losing money once in 10 cases is acceptable. If the promised returns are high, say ROIs of 20% per year, I might take on as much as 1 in 5 odds. But if it get 1 in four or even worse, I would consider it too risky - too speculative - and walk away.
What risks do you take?
My point is a rental property is a small business, one does not buy & run a business to create appreciation value, a business is run on cash flow. I could not have started from virtually nothing by buying gold or stocks for that matter (especially not me)
First of all, I do analyze investment concepts to better understand what I am doing. As such, trying define risk or the difference between 'speculation and investing' is essential. Without going into details, I can assure you that I am far from only a 'theoretical investor' although I like to count my beans
Secondly, it is nonsense to state that one does not run a business to create appreciation value. We create a business to make money and nobody cares too much about whether the profits are due to appreciation or due to positive cash flow. That is pretty 'practical' I would say.
I agree with Jhonsu that when buying units, one at a time, it is tough to make your profits only from cashflow. Even if positive, the bulk of the profits is often from leveraged appreciation and mortgage paydown. It is fine with me, if you only consider your positive cashflow as profit. If you don't want the rest, then feel free to forward it to me
This discussion is not necessarily about 'speculation vs investment' it is about risk and risk management. In those terms, appreciation of real estate is over the longterm as close to a given as you can get in the investment world - just as it is with stocks. What is less certain is how much appreciation - is it 3%, 4% or 6% per year? Long term appreciation charts may give you an idea about your area's historical performance. (scenario 1)
If you buy a condo or house that has still to be build and you use a small down payment and high leverage; your risk level would be high. If you intend to sell right upon completion of construction withing in one or 2 years then the risk of not getting value appreciation is likely very high. To top it off, if you have no cash flow as with a normal rental property your risk may become excessive. So what are the chances of making money here in the end? 1 in 2 or 1 in 10? Or does it approach the odds of winning in the lottery? (scenario 2).
Most people would consider the second scenario extremely risky and 'speculative', while most investors would consider the first scenario as a well thought out investment. So in my opinion, speculation has nothing to do with the source of your profits but more with the odds of making money (or at least recovering your initial investment). Where to place the boundary between investing and speculation remains to be seen. Personally, I would think odds of losing money once in 10 cases is acceptable. If the promised returns are high, say ROIs of 20% per year, I might take on as much as 1 in 5 odds. But if it get 1 in four or even worse, I would consider it too risky - too speculative - and walk away.
What risks do you take?
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2007
- Messages
- 4,733
Hi Michael
To respond to your post - fair enough - my way of looking at things is none of those examples listed in my post meet a first level filter - if a property does not have a stable revenue source to meet 10% rule it should not be looked at further...
To respond to your post - fair enough - my way of looking at things is none of those examples listed in my post meet a first level filter - if a property does not have a stable revenue source to meet 10% rule it should not be looked at further...
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2007
- Messages
- 13,881
[quote user=housingrental] if a property does not have a stable revenue source to meet 10% rule it should not be looked at further one person's opinion .. many great properties exist in the 7-8% range .. but the TRUE test is REAL NET INCOME .. after expenses .. and then its UPSIDE through economics: GDP growth, job growth, in-migration, income growth thus: value growth !
Can you make money in flat markets: yes ! .. but a lot less than in rising markets !!
Can you make money in flat markets: yes ! .. but a lot less than in rising markets !!
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2009
- Messages
- 1,210
Speaking for myself I have to agree with Michael. If the property doesn't meet the 10% rule, I won't waste my time looking at it any further. I can find better yields elsewhere along with the same, or better, potential for future appreciation. It also saves me a lot of time.
Best regards.
Best regards.
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2007
- Messages
- 13,881
[quote user=Rickson9] I can find better yields elsewhere such as where ?
US ? Where in Canada ?
US ? Where in Canada ?