Skip to content
×
Try PRO Free Today!
BiggerPockets Pro offers you a comprehensive suite of tools and resources
Market and Deal Finder Tools
Deal Analysis Calculators
Property Management Software
Exclusive discounts to Home Depot, RentRedi, and more
$0
7 days free
$828/yr or $69/mo when billed monthly.
$390/yr or $32.5/mo when billed annually.
7 days free. Cancel anytime.
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here

Join Over 3 Million Real Estate Investors

Create a free BiggerPockets account to comment, participate, and connect with over 3 million real estate investors.
Use your real name
By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions.
The community here is like my own little personal real estate army that I can depend upon to help me through ANY problems I come across.
Multi-Family and Apartment Investing
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

Updated over 7 years ago on . Most recent reply

User Stats

65
Posts
32
Votes
Jennifer Brown
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Fort Worth, TX
32
Votes |
65
Posts

Job Growth or Job Stagnation? Which Location is Better?

Jennifer Brown
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Fort Worth, TX
Posted

I watched a video recently on a guy whose strategy in choosing a multifamily investment location is to find slower job growth. His philosophy is if wages are stagnant, then there won't be any raised rents and therefore, there won't be any merchant builders adding new product to the area. Thus being one of the only good renting options. 

Now on the same token, I've also seen that in choosing a location, you should make sure there is job growth and population growth. 

So my question is what are the pros/cons of both methods? I'm not even sure the first option is a good strategy so I'm anxious to get people's opinions! 

Loading replies...