Three years renting, yearly update

[poorsaver]

Sold in Nov. ’05 and have been renting ever since. I said it last year, and I’ll say it again: “renting sucks!”.

So let’s do the math. 36 months of rent X $2800 per month = $100,800. Have I saved that amount over just staying put? No. My house continued to rise in value until mid-late 2007, where it peaked about $700K more than I sold it. It has since come down about 15%, which still makes it about $300K more than I sold it. Not including taxes and maintenance, I’m negative about $400K from simply staying put.

How about compared to buying a modest replacement home instead of renting? It would have cost about $600K. It’s worth about $450K today, a difference of $150K. Again, calculating the simple math not counting any extra expenses or tax benefits (which I wouldn’t get any because I’m an all cash kind of person), I would be ahead by about $50K. Whoopdy do!. I think over the three years, it would have been worth the extra $50K to own what you live in.

In summary, the numbers didn’t really add up for me to have sold three years ago and rented. In addition, being a renter you always have this unsettled feeling about your existence. Anyway, you know what they say about hindsight.

[EconProf]

I don’t buy your numbers.
First, the market peaked in 2005 by some measures (depending upon area). Some analysts put the peak in early 2006. But you say you sold in November of 2005 and it continued to go up by $700k? No way, no how. More likely you nailed the peak–give yourself credit for timing.
Your other numbers don’t make sense either. How can you be negative $400k from staying put? And please tell us what neighborhood peaked in “mid-late 2007?

[EconProf]

I don’t buy your numbers.
First, the market peaked in 2005 by some measures (depending upon area). Some analysts put the peak in early 2006. But you say you sold in November of 2005 and it continued to go up by $700k? No way, no how. More likely you nailed the peak–give yourself credit for timing.
Your other numbers don’t make sense either. How can you be negative $400k from staying put? And please tell us what neighborhood peaked in “mid-late 2007?

[EconProf]

I don’t buy your numbers.
First, the market peaked in 2005 by some measures (depending upon area). Some analysts put the peak in early 2006. But you say you sold in November of 2005 and it continued to go up by $700k? No way, no how. More likely you nailed the peak–give yourself credit for timing.
Your other numbers don’t make sense either. How can you be negative $400k from staying put? And please tell us what neighborhood peaked in “mid-late 2007?

[EconProf]

I don’t buy your numbers.
First, the market peaked in 2005 by some measures (depending upon area). Some analysts put the peak in early 2006. But you say you sold in November of 2005 and it continued to go up by $700k? No way, no how. More likely you nailed the peak–give yourself credit for timing.
Your other numbers don’t make sense either. How can you be negative $400k from staying put? And please tell us what neighborhood peaked in “mid-late 2007?

[EconProf]

I don’t buy your numbers.
First, the market peaked in 2005 by some measures (depending upon area). Some analysts put the peak in early 2006. But you say you sold in November of 2005 and it continued to go up by $700k? No way, no how. More likely you nailed the peak–give yourself credit for timing.
Your other numbers don’t make sense either. How can you be negative $400k from staying put? And please tell us what neighborhood peaked in “mid-late 2007?

[peterb]

Proving once again, that timing is everything.

[peterb]

Proving once again, that timing is everything.

[peterb]

Proving once again, that timing is everything.

[peterb]

Proving once again, that timing is everything.

[peterb]

Proving once again, that timing is everything.

[stockstradr]

We’ve rented since we dumped our San Diego condo in late 2004, and it certainly has NOT sucked.

We sold that condo to an investor, who then rented that same condo back to us. We never moved. It was such an odd story that the WSJ actually wrote a front-page article that included that story about us and our condo. COST ANALYSIS: that investor lost on average $6,000 in equity per month, for every month we paid him $1,500 in rent. (That condo declined in value from $405K down to $280K.)

Then we moved to Silicon Valley where we rented a 2,200 sq ft home for $2,600/month. We rented from the most successful (by sales volume) husband-wife Realtor team in Silicon Valley, yet they didn’t anticipate the housing crash. COST ANALYSIS: this landlord has thus far lost $12,000 (no joking) in equity PER MONTH, for every month we’ve so far rented this home from them. (Their rental property declined in value during that period from $850K down to less than $700K.)

It can really pay to rent!

[stockstradr]

We’ve rented since we dumped our San Diego condo in late 2004, and it certainly has NOT sucked.

We sold that condo to an investor, who then rented that same condo back to us. We never moved. It was such an odd story that the WSJ actually wrote a front-page article that included that story about us and our condo. COST ANALYSIS: that investor lost on average $6,000 in equity per month, for every month we paid him $1,500 in rent. (That condo declined in value from $405K down to $280K.)

Then we moved to Silicon Valley where we rented a 2,200 sq ft home for $2,600/month. We rented from the most successful (by sales volume) husband-wife Realtor team in Silicon Valley, yet they didn’t anticipate the housing crash. COST ANALYSIS: this landlord has thus far lost $12,000 (no joking) in equity PER MONTH, for every month we’ve so far rented this home from them. (Their rental property declined in value during that period from $850K down to less than $700K.)

It can really pay to rent!

[stockstradr]

We’ve rented since we dumped our San Diego condo in late 2004, and it certainly has NOT sucked.

We sold that condo to an investor, who then rented that same condo back to us. We never moved. It was such an odd story that the WSJ actually wrote a front-page article that included that story about us and our condo. COST ANALYSIS: that investor lost on average $6,000 in equity per month, for every month we paid him $1,500 in rent. (That condo declined in value from $405K down to $280K.)

Then we moved to Silicon Valley where we rented a 2,200 sq ft home for $2,600/month. We rented from the most successful (by sales volume) husband-wife Realtor team in Silicon Valley, yet they didn’t anticipate the housing crash. COST ANALYSIS: this landlord has thus far lost $12,000 (no joking) in equity PER MONTH, for every month we’ve so far rented this home from them. (Their rental property declined in value during that period from $850K down to less than $700K.)

It can really pay to rent!

[stockstradr]

We’ve rented since we dumped our San Diego condo in late 2004, and it certainly has NOT sucked.

We sold that condo to an investor, who then rented that same condo back to us. We never moved. It was such an odd story that the WSJ actually wrote a front-page article that included that story about us and our condo. COST ANALYSIS: that investor lost on average $6,000 in equity per month, for every month we paid him $1,500 in rent. (That condo declined in value from $405K down to $280K.)

Then we moved to Silicon Valley where we rented a 2,200 sq ft home for $2,600/month. We rented from the most successful (by sales volume) husband-wife Realtor team in Silicon Valley, yet they didn’t anticipate the housing crash. COST ANALYSIS: this landlord has thus far lost $12,000 (no joking) in equity PER MONTH, for every month we’ve so far rented this home from them. (Their rental property declined in value during that period from $850K down to less than $700K.)

It can really pay to rent!

[Author]

Posts