|
POPULAR LINKS
INVESTOR'S FOCUS
REAL ESTATE TOOLS
FORECLOSURE RESOURCES
LANDLORD CENTER
FIND SPECIALIZED PROPERTIES
LOCAL RESOURCES
|
Christina F.Real Estate InvestorMt. Shasta, California |
I live in Lake Shastina California. A few years ago, in the bubble, I saw real estate prices going up and decided to get into the rental business and I bought three rentals. Long story short, these houses cost ARV between 200 plus to almost 300. At most I get 1,100 a month each. Obviously they are not making money month to month. My question. Should I sell them now or hold on for the next bubble? Tina |
||
|
|||
Mitch F.Real Estate InvestorPortland, Oregon |
How much do you owe on them? You could always sell them through a Lease Option...get a consideration up front to lock in a 12 or 24 month purchase price..drive up the monthly rent a few hundred higher than the current and offer rent credits if the tenant exercises the right to purchase. I would charge about 5% up front for the option fee which credits to the purchase price if the option is exercised. That is one way to sell them if you don't want to mess around with listing on the market. |
||
Jon H.Real Estate InvestorDenver, Colorado Moderator |
[Edited to correct math] How much could you sell them for now? You're taking a monthly loss. I'd guess that at about $1000/month/house after all the expenses and vacancies.
Edited: 09/19/2008 at 06:35AM by Jon H. |
||
Mitch F.Real Estate InvestorPortland, Oregon |
Sure but the great thing about the lease option is if you do get some consideration up front then that can make up for the negative cash flow each month...doesn't matter what the market does...if your tenant doesn't exercise then find another lease option tenant and get another consideration up front... but we haven't found out yet how much is owed on these properties...tough to gauge the situation without knowing the debt service |
||
Matty M.Real Estate InvestorEncino, CA |
I could be wrong. But aren't big cycle swings typical for California? Or least Los Angeles and other big areas here. I've only been intermittently paying attention to real estate for the last seven years. But I thought I remembered seeing data from Bruce Norris that showed a few huge California cycles in the last 40 years. And how we usually bust in when when affordability gets to 14%. Either way I think it's going to a while. Lately I feel overly optimistic by saying we'd be almost back to 2006 SoCal prices in 7 years. 2016 seems too close for that lately. What if you were able to acquire some great deals now that could off set the negatives on those properties, so you could hold them. Such as lease options, or another deal structure, on completely different properties . Edited: 09/19/2008 at 03:02AM by Matty M. |
||
Jon H.Real Estate InvestorDenver, Colorado Moderator |
Cycles in real estate happen everywhere. So, if this had just been part of a typical cycle, I would agree. It wasn't. The bubble that's now burst was caused by easy availability of money. Anyone could get a loan and could get terms that made it possible for the to buy (though not keep) expensive houses. Demand went up, prices went up. Find the Cash-Shiller data, and have a look. What happened for 2000 to 2006, and that's still unwinding now has no historical precedent. Once that finishes unwinding, we will get back on the historical trend line. That line is driven by inflation. Since we're so far above it, we have to fall quite a bit to get back on track. Further, since the financial markets are in such chaos, and its hard to get loans, we may end up falling even below this trend line. Once we're back on track, will follow that trend, with the 7+/- year cycles you mention. The good news, if you can call it that, is that inflation shows every sign of getting very high. So, that will run the trend line up faster, making for less of a fall before we hit the trend. If you could acquire some great deals (i.e., generate more income), it still wouldn't make sense to keep them. I miscalculated on the loss (what I get for posting late at night). I'd guess it more like $1000/month. So, if you can get a 5% option money, it would still only cover the loss for a year. Look, they're investments. They turned out to be bad investments. No different that a stock or other investment. They suck. Dump them. |
||
Mitch F.Real Estate InvestorPortland, Oregon |
I agree...dump them if you can. But if selling is not an option due to the debt owed then its either stop making the payments and go after a short sale or make the best of a bad situation and mitigate losses. No sense in putting another home on the rmls if you can't even afford the commissions. Plus the homes will probably be vacant while trying to sell...thus increasing losses. I can't imagine these homes are gonna fly off of the market. If 5% only covers a year and the tenant doesn't exercise...then find a new lease option tenant and get another 5% to cover the next year...its non refundable if they don't exercise. If they exercise then even better. |
||
Dwayne B.Real Estate InvestorSan Diego , California |
Christina, When you consider the momentum of the loss you will have to compensate for once the market at least stabilizes (probably a few years), it is difficult to see how you compensate for that loss.
Best wishes and good luck,
|
||
Dwayne B.Real Estate InvestorSan Diego , California |
Christina, I should have added. Your rent to value is so bad (about 1/2 a percent). You bought WAY too high.
Again, good luck Dwayne |
||
Ingrid N.Property ManagerPassaic, New Jersey |
This is precisely what happened to me in the late 80's. The only difference was my problem was and is: Retaining value. Bought a property for 65K. 6 months later the bottom fell out, it became REO heaven. With my ARM I was negatively cash flowing for $200 a month. I hung in there and a few yrs later picked up an REO unit for $13K. Although I'm in a positive cash flow situation on both with one debt free, the rental market was and remains strong so that's were I've stayed. During the recent bubble, values went back up to $65K. I didn't sell. Value today is $40K. The fluctation in almost 20 yrs clearly showed that this investment did not appreciate with the rest of the market. But it cash flows well...............so I just lease out and go about my normal course of business. |
||
Alexis K.Homeownerreno, NV |
Ingrid, You are fortunate. Christina is negatively cashflowing about 2K a month. She will need a bigger bubble than the last to gain appreciation. I say sell now; take your losses or go bankrupt.
|
||


Moderator