Yhhhjj
Asking rents in San Francisco continue to slip, but…
91–100 of 131 posts
Re: Asking rents in San Francisco continue to slip, but…
#92Jjkkoii
Re: Asking rents in San Francisco continue to slip, but…
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
From what I've seen of SF rentals and landlords, that's potentially the most money he had spent on maintenance & renovations in a decade, while collecting some of the most profitable rent in the country.
With a price to rent ratio of 53, San Francisco has the least profitable rent in the country. https://smartasset.com/mortgage/price-to-rent-ratio-50-large...
Yes, if you bought today. What's the point of your post?
Re: Asking rents in San Francisco continue to slip, but…
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Capital gains in the markets I'm familiar with - and this is an international problem - dwarf any rental income. In Auckland, New Zealand, average capital gains exceed $40,000 per month. Land banking is incredibly lucrative.
> In Auckland, New Zealand, average capital gains exceed $40,000 per month. Land banking is incredibly lucrative. On what property value?
Average property price in Auckland is 1.2M NZD. Property prices rose 20%+ last year in Auckland. So the capital gains quoted aren't really average, the average rate is half of that.
Sure there are outliers; but if your property costs 2.4M NZD (1.7M USD) then those numbers are accurate. Either way, land is the best investment right now and I don't see it crashing any time soon.
"Land can only go up". Even with COVID and closed borders.
Re: Asking rents in San Francisco continue to slip, but…
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
With a price to rent ratio of 53, San Francisco has the least profitable rent in the country. https://smartasset.com/mortgage/price-to-rent-ratio-50-large...
Yes, if you bought today. What's the point of your post?
It makes intuitive sense for San Francisco to be "the most profitable rent in the country" as you claimed, but the surprising and counterintuitive truth is that it's the opposite.
Re: Asking rents in San Francisco continue to slip, but…
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, if you bought today. What's the point of your post?
It makes intuitive sense for San Francisco to be "the most profitable rent in the country" as you claimed, but the surprising and counterintuitive truth is that it's the opposite.
Are you claiming that landlords who purchased property in SF 15+ years ago aren't making extremely high profits off rent?
Re: Asking rents in San Francisco continue to slip, but…
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The systemic problem is that investors are buying up residential property inventory Are you assuming that it's somehow sensible to buy property and leave it empty? Owner vs rental doesn't change the number of homes available.
> Are you assuming that it's somehow sensible to buy property and leave it empty? Yes if it has been financed in certain ways. An empty space is assumed to be rented at the same rate as it was before being empty and that empty rent can normally be tacked onto the end of the financing as it is assumed to be a "temporary" thing. However, if that space gets occupied for less money, the basis of the real estate adjusts a…
whoever that is doing the money lending is taking the hit by assuming the rental income from prior periods during a vacated period.
So if they don't care, then why would _I_ care that they don't care?
Re: Asking rents in San Francisco continue to slip, but…
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
It makes intuitive sense for San Francisco to be "the most profitable rent in the country" as you claimed, but the surprising and counterintuitive truth is that it's the opposite.
Are you claiming that landlords who purchased property in SF 15+ years ago aren't making extremely high profits off rent?
The point is they could make even more by selling and using the money to buy in places with higher rent/buy ratio.
They've made more money from appreciation than from rising rents.
Re: Asking rents in San Francisco continue to slip, but…
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The systemic problem is that investors are buying up residential property inventory, because there is a massive amount of near 0% cash available to a thin slice of the population. This is absolutely a global problem: New Zealand, Australia, parts of Canada, the UK, are all having the same issues.
Japan doesn’t have this problem because they build housing sufficient to meet demand. Deciding not to build enough housing to meet demand so property owners make money: It’s the Anglo way.
> build housing sufficient to meet demand
they also accept that in dense Tokyo metro areas, the sizes of places are tiny.
I dont think the Anglo way works - you cannot have both dense, but big apartments.
Re: Asking rents in San Francisco continue to slip, but…
#100The systemic problem is that investors are buying up residential property inventory, because there is a massive amount of near 0% cash available to a thin slice of the population. So even though there are as many people as there were roughly a year ago, there are far fewer homes. Hence purchase prices are rocketing up and rental prices are drifting down. There is no strong political will to solve this problem, becaus…
Is it better to buy a home for investment than it is to buy stocks?
if you can easily get a 5x leverage (20% down) for a property investment due to the current lending environment, then yea, a property is going to return more. But comparing like for like - zero leverage - stocks are always going to be better (and correspondingly riskier).