[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Sounds like a variant on rent-to-own or lease-option.

If there is not a significant premium over renting (including all non-refundable deposits and monthly payments) then it might make sense as a buyer.

But, it all depends on the specifics of the deal.

I think most sellers in these deal command a significant premium over market rent, and often make the most profit when the buyer does not follow through.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Sounds like a variant on rent-to-own or lease-option.

If there is not a significant premium over renting (including all non-refundable deposits and monthly payments) then it might make sense as a buyer.

But, it all depends on the specifics of the deal.

I think most sellers in these deal command a significant premium over market rent, and often make the most profit when the buyer does not follow through.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

If your cash is earmarked for an eventual real estate purchase the only thing that matters for that cash is the relative value of real estate.
As long as real estate does not appreciate signficantly, you are fine.

Now, as for cash above and beyond what you have earmarked for real estate, that is another issue.

Personally, I like to diversify, aiming towards bout 35% of my assets in cash, 20% in property and 35% in US stocks. The remainder is scattered among commodities (old, Oil) and foreign stocks.

My crystal ball broek a couple years ago, so I am taking positions on both sides of the inflation/deflation debate. If deflation prevails, cash is king. If inflaiton prevails, property and commodities will hold their value.

The only problem with this approach is that no matter what I will be partly wrong. But, since I realize I have been wrong before, it’s the best approach for me.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

If your cash is earmarked for an eventual real estate purchase the only thing that matters for that cash is the relative value of real estate.
As long as real estate does not appreciate signficantly, you are fine.

Now, as for cash above and beyond what you have earmarked for real estate, that is another issue.

Personally, I like to diversify, aiming towards bout 35% of my assets in cash, 20% in property and 35% in US stocks. The remainder is scattered among commodities (old, Oil) and foreign stocks.

My crystal ball broek a couple years ago, so I am taking positions on both sides of the inflation/deflation debate. If deflation prevails, cash is king. If inflaiton prevails, property and commodities will hold their value.

The only problem with this approach is that no matter what I will be partly wrong. But, since I realize I have been wrong before, it’s the best approach for me.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

If your cash is earmarked for an eventual real estate purchase the only thing that matters for that cash is the relative value of real estate.
As long as real estate does not appreciate signficantly, you are fine.

Now, as for cash above and beyond what you have earmarked for real estate, that is another issue.

Personally, I like to diversify, aiming towards bout 35% of my assets in cash, 20% in property and 35% in US stocks. The remainder is scattered among commodities (old, Oil) and foreign stocks.

My crystal ball broek a couple years ago, so I am taking positions on both sides of the inflation/deflation debate. If deflation prevails, cash is king. If inflaiton prevails, property and commodities will hold their value.

The only problem with this approach is that no matter what I will be partly wrong. But, since I realize I have been wrong before, it’s the best approach for me.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

If your cash is earmarked for an eventual real estate purchase the only thing that matters for that cash is the relative value of real estate.
As long as real estate does not appreciate signficantly, you are fine.

Now, as for cash above and beyond what you have earmarked for real estate, that is another issue.

Personally, I like to diversify, aiming towards bout 35% of my assets in cash, 20% in property and 35% in US stocks. The remainder is scattered among commodities (old, Oil) and foreign stocks.

My crystal ball broek a couple years ago, so I am taking positions on both sides of the inflation/deflation debate. If deflation prevails, cash is king. If inflaiton prevails, property and commodities will hold their value.

The only problem with this approach is that no matter what I will be partly wrong. But, since I realize I have been wrong before, it’s the best approach for me.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

If your cash is earmarked for an eventual real estate purchase the only thing that matters for that cash is the relative value of real estate.
As long as real estate does not appreciate signficantly, you are fine.

Now, as for cash above and beyond what you have earmarked for real estate, that is another issue.

Personally, I like to diversify, aiming towards bout 35% of my assets in cash, 20% in property and 35% in US stocks. The remainder is scattered among commodities (old, Oil) and foreign stocks.

My crystal ball broek a couple years ago, so I am taking positions on both sides of the inflation/deflation debate. If deflation prevails, cash is king. If inflaiton prevails, property and commodities will hold their value.

The only problem with this approach is that no matter what I will be partly wrong. But, since I realize I have been wrong before, it’s the best approach for me.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=flu]
Any ideas why?

I’m thinking
1) Too much competition in L.A.
2) L.A. economy is in much worse shape than S.D.[/quote]

I think it’s because everyone in LA already has a BMW.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=flu]
Any ideas why?

I’m thinking
1) Too much competition in L.A.
2) L.A. economy is in much worse shape than S.D.[/quote]

I think it’s because everyone in LA already has a BMW.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=flu]
Any ideas why?

I’m thinking
1) Too much competition in L.A.
2) L.A. economy is in much worse shape than S.D.[/quote]

I think it’s because everyone in LA already has a BMW.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=flu]
Any ideas why?

I’m thinking
1) Too much competition in L.A.
2) L.A. economy is in much worse shape than S.D.[/quote]

I think it’s because everyone in LA already has a BMW.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=flu]
Any ideas why?

I’m thinking
1) Too much competition in L.A.
2) L.A. economy is in much worse shape than S.D.[/quote]

I think it’s because everyone in LA already has a BMW.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=Ricechex]Monthly rent = $1200
Monthly mortgage = $1015 (impound acct. includes PITI)
Gardener = $50 month
Yearly maintenance varies, some years it has been up to $5000, other years $1000.
House needs new roof, new exterior paint, and likely the water heater is gonna go soon too.
It would sell for $160K, we owe $128K.

What is an alligator property?[/quote]

This isn’t a great investment. But if you did not have a partner, it might be worth the effort to keep it (your paying down the note and getting a tax break for a modest outlay).
But, it sounds like the real problem is that you put more into it than your partner and that deferred maintenance is limiting the property performance.

I would get out , You’ll likely net less than 10K each (or less, assuming your price is in the right ballpark) after sale expenses/taxes.

If your partner doesn’t want to sell, ask them to buy you out. They can get a property manager and realize the value you added.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=Ricechex]Monthly rent = $1200
Monthly mortgage = $1015 (impound acct. includes PITI)
Gardener = $50 month
Yearly maintenance varies, some years it has been up to $5000, other years $1000.
House needs new roof, new exterior paint, and likely the water heater is gonna go soon too.
It would sell for $160K, we owe $128K.

What is an alligator property?[/quote]

This isn’t a great investment. But if you did not have a partner, it might be worth the effort to keep it (your paying down the note and getting a tax break for a modest outlay).
But, it sounds like the real problem is that you put more into it than your partner and that deferred maintenance is limiting the property performance.

I would get out , You’ll likely net less than 10K each (or less, assuming your price is in the right ballpark) after sale expenses/taxes.

If your partner doesn’t want to sell, ask them to buy you out. They can get a property manager and realize the value you added.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=Ricechex]Monthly rent = $1200
Monthly mortgage = $1015 (impound acct. includes PITI)
Gardener = $50 month
Yearly maintenance varies, some years it has been up to $5000, other years $1000.
House needs new roof, new exterior paint, and likely the water heater is gonna go soon too.
It would sell for $160K, we owe $128K.

What is an alligator property?[/quote]

This isn’t a great investment. But if you did not have a partner, it might be worth the effort to keep it (your paying down the note and getting a tax break for a modest outlay).
But, it sounds like the real problem is that you put more into it than your partner and that deferred maintenance is limiting the property performance.

I would get out , You’ll likely net less than 10K each (or less, assuming your price is in the right ballpark) after sale expenses/taxes.

If your partner doesn’t want to sell, ask them to buy you out. They can get a property manager and realize the value you added.

[Author]

Posts