All Forum Posts by: Byron Bohlsen

If you like the car and expect it to go another 100k after the repairs then sure, or buy a different used one you like? The depreciation on the 10k car will almost certainly be more then the delta on your repairs vs value. I am not familiar with volvos and expected reliability but generally speaking its cheaper to keep a beater running then driving newer car. 

The newer car will have stuff that breaks and needs fixing as well, except the repairs will be more expensive vs the older car. My friend has a newer Murano and has gone through 3 transmissions all lasting about 60k miles. All mechanics she talked to says it isn't her car or her driving its just about how long they are expected to last now days(newer doesn't mean more reliable).

I had a nice used mustang and ended up selling for a nice used Maxima, which I ended up selling for a nice used 1998 oldsmobile intrigue, 170k miles, $1400. I actually enjoy driving the intrigue more then the Maxima. Having grown up driving an intrigue I know what maintenance items to expect and when to expect them. My car should last another 70-100k miles.

  My point is there is nothing wrong with driving a beater, especially if 10k is going to have a fairly noticeable impact on your investing timelines. I would not however advise driving a beater beater... rust everywhere, stuff falling off etc.

If  the volvo isnt a time bomb just fix the transmission regardless the resale value.  cheapest option period. 

Sent PM

Thanks!

We have a local broker who gave us her opinion but we dont trust her due to giving us some false information and the fact that she is taking every opportunity to discourage us from rehabing the place vs selling as is. 

Looking into getting a second opinion but also was hoping to get the opinion of a trusted BP member on top of that opinion :) 

Hi!

Is anyone here familiar with mill valley and can help estimate an arv? Much appreciated!

Also when it comes to things like yard work and snow removal it isnt as straight forward with MF vs SF.

Many argue that the benefits to multifamily are that if you have a vacancy in MF you still have money coming in where as in SF you have a vacancy and your losing money. 

This may be valid in some cases but In this case since the pricing is the same its more about feeling good. A vacancy in SH means your individual investment is producing no return but from a portfolio perspective it comes out the same. 

As for the whole one side will be rented so you still make money argument - To some this is a valid reasoning and will help some sleep better at night and if thats you that's great but I would argue that if your looking at your portfolio as a whole it doesn't really matter since the numbers are the same since a vacancy is a vacancy. 

The insurance and maintenance costs will likely be higher with two individual homes. However there is alot of things to consider - Does the duplex have design faults? What about condition of the homes, quality of neighboorhoods? 

SFH will likely attract longer staying and better quality tenants, but not always. With SFH you will be able to charge very similar in rent but have the benefit of being able to push all utilities on to the tenant(If thats common), not always the case with duplex.

SFH easier to sell if you get in trouble.

So no problems improving the property- Thank you!

This home is currently very outdated 1960s but has a very high resale value (1 million+) with a fresh rehab so we are wanting to take advantage and make some profit. 

Thanks!