All Forum Posts by: Paul B.

I like J. Scott's approach. I think the reason it makes sense is because a balance sheet (1) is supposed to be accurate as of the date it's prepared, not taking into account the future, and (2) is prepared for the purpose of saying, "OK, if we had to liquidate everything today and convert it to cash, what would we be left with?" His method does that perfectly.

Most hard money lenders I know would charge that 15% coupon and 5 points for a 6-month deal, though, not a 12-month -- which is really 25% annualized (assuming that loan repays on the last day of the sixth month).

There is only one explanation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WofFb_eOxxA

So much for a "helping hand," eh, Bryan? :mrgreen:

You already know that the seller is not going to do anything that will cause this tenant to move, and he probably can't, anyway, unless he invokes some clause in the lease about how the property is being maintained. So, it seems like your options include (1) doing a little soul-searching and finding a way to keep the tenant, or (2) buying the property, waiting for the lease to expire, then not renewing.

I don't know all the details, but as you know, no one really chooses to live that way by complete choice. Is there an opportunity here for you to help someone who might really need help?

A lease is a contract.

Why do you want to lose the one tenant who, without being disrespectful, isn't going anywhere?

I agree. If you can hit the escape hatch button, eject from this deal immediately.

There are deals out there with much better numbers and much less risk.

Your cash flows relative to your purchase price are marginal at best. In all candor, I think you're overpaying, although I could not profess to you know your market. When you add in the talk of mold, asbestos, etc., there's just too much downside here compared to the upside.

Eject, and move on to a better deal.

I see you are in Virginia. If you're near Washington, D.C., get plugged into John Peterson's REIA there (washingtonreianetwork.com). John is a good guy and straight shooter.

If a hard-money lender will not do the deal, chances are you shouldn't do it, either, because there's not enough fat in the deal.

Similarly, if you feel that using this kind of financing is too risky, then it's actually the deal that's risky. If the spread between hard-money rates and "regular" rates eats up your profit, the deal is too thin to begin with.

My instinct is that you should pass.

For the most part, and I can speak only about where I live, bandit signs are illegal. And thank goodness for that, since most of them are downright ugly. And setting aside the awful, handwritten signs, does it really help any neighborhood's aesthetics to have signs that talk about "foreclosure help" staked in every corner?

Most of these signs are on private property without the owner's permission, or they are on public property. My take is, if you have to tack your sign up 9-10 feet so people don't take them down, or if you need to get an untraceable phone number so you can avoid a fine, you need to rethink what you're doing.

Sure, it might be effective, but you know that it's wrong (again, in the cases I am referring to). It's like the people who tape a flyer to my mailbox, or stick a business card in a sandwich bag with some pebbles and throw it in my driveway. Now THOSE are two things that drive me batty. (Yes, I am a full-fledged curmudgeon at the ripe old age of 43.)

If a sign is legal and agreeable to the property owner, go for it. I might not like it, but I can't subject the world to my personal taste. (And what a pity that is!)

If there is one marketing tool that I wish would go away, it's the "bandit sign."

Call it what it is: littering.