All Forum Posts by: Jared Viernes

@Jordan McNelly

Not at all.

@Jordan McNelly

Heck ya man. Get a portfolio lender (fidelity bank does it if it's large enough) then refinance some or all of your portfolio along with the commercial property purchase.

Flipping is a job man. In my opinion you give way to much away to the government when you go that way. Cash flow is king, but equity is where you build real wealth. The more properties you have in your portfolio the stronger it becomes and the faster the equity builds. If you fix and flip you lose equity appreciation over time and the government takes a big chunk of your cash. If you use debt the government will let you deduct not only the interest payments but depreciation that is earned mostly by the bank giving you the loan but you claim it all. If I can hold on to a property I will. Every single time. ROE is so much more profitable than ROI.

Every person has their own strategy, but I've always felt buy and hold and keeping a manageable amount of leverage across your portfolio.

Let me put it this way. I underwrite a lot of loans for CRE. I have seen people earn millions in cash flow and pay $0 in taxes because they are always buying new properties and keeping a manageable amount of leverage across their portfolio. You do fix and flips you aren't going to get that. You are going to pay like it's W2 income. The government definitely wins in this strategy. The laws benefit long term buy and hold real estate investors. Particularly those that use leverage. Banks win, you win, and the government gets little to nothing.

@Jordan McNelly

Remember to account for differences in taxation. If possible I would always BRRRR because it just makes more sense from a taxation standpoint. Flipping houses is a great way to make money short term, the problem is it is taxed like a job you put in a lot of hard work and the government takes a huge chunk. If you are in it for the long haul then it's equity you want. The best part is when you have enough built up it's just as good as cash, except you aren't taxed on this cash because it's technically debt. Leverage the equity in your portfolio with a HELOC to purchase and rehab outright. Using bank funds to increase your ROE.

So it sounds like me you built additional equity into the home your living in now. Have you looked into getting a HELOC on the home now that you have a lot more equity in it? You do that then you could have a lot of cash available to finance your next purchase and perhaps renovation costs as well. Then you could choose if you want to move into that next house and sell your current home with some tax benefits. Or you could keep it as a rental and eventually refi the second property. If you get enough experience doing exactly what you did with your first property there are lenders that would no require your purchase to "season". Perhaps you could even get your new property rented out at a rate that would pay your heloc bill, at interest-only payments that should be fairly easy. Then you have a whole new house with additional equity you created perhaps then you can get a heloc on that home if you cannot refinance it.

Talk to lenders about your plan before so you can make sure it will work with you. The strength of what you have done so far is you are building equity. The problem with selling is a lot of that equity will be lost when you sell it either through taxes or payments to your listing agent.

If you ever have the ability to limit these types of fees and still be able to use your equity to fund additional purchases I think you should. That method will increase your ROE significantly more.

Also read the BP book on BRRRR investing. You did your first purchase a bit out of order to get those most out of your purchase. But it sounds it worked out well for your equity position. Keep up the good work. Start to get those on homes with renters in them. Would you be able to get roommates in your current place so you could get some cashflow from the home you are living in?

@Kimberly Gooding not yet to another state. But I definitely use a property manager. Just make sure to vet them.

Wichita is a fantastic place to invest. Lots of opportunity for cash flow and quite a bit of appreciation even in the less desirable neighborhoods. I've had great experiences with PMs and all the homes I own are really hands off. 

That being said there is not a lot of inventory available and regular homebuyers have shot up prices to regularly go 10-15% over asking. Housing developers are building as fast as they can and making a killing doing so. But just like the rest of the world they are struggling to get enough supplies. The pandemic created a huge backlog in supply availability and its even worse here because Amazon has bought up a whole lot of the concrete here to build their new fulfillment center in Park City. Supply costs and inventory availability makes it much harder to grab great deals. It's definitely still possible but be cautious, don't find yourself paying too much because you just want to get a purchase.

@Joseph Hamer do you have direct MLS access or through an IDX? If you have access directly then you have a lot of capability to sort through sales. Just get acquainted with the search capabilities and you can learn a lot. If you don't already get a map that shows the different zones identified and you can get really specific with your search. It's also a great way to identify potential deals fast.

This is the problem when people surround themselves with yes men. Someone told the owner it would be a good name without actually listening to the people who would be supporting the team. Now there is a whole bunch of crappy merchandise and uniforms which will make it nearly impossible to change the name now... WTH.

@Andy Lucero welcome!

@Jonathan R. that’s great! I’ll try and make it out.

@Jonathan R. they  haven’t actually released them yet that I have seen. The big reveal is this Thursday and between then and January they will try to build a consensus they can get the city to support.

@Shane H. I am trying to keep my opinion open until I see the results of the studies they have done and gathered together.

However, my initial views before seeing everything is that it will probably make the most fiscal sense to get rid of century II because the redesign would still be very expensive and limit what could actually be done to things less likely to result in a path forward for Wichita. As someone from Seattle, I remember the Kingdome being destroyed and I saw it less as destroying an icon than making way for progress. I believe if the goal is to make Wichita able to host more conventions and performing arts, the better place is tear down, replace, and modernize.

I think as investors it is more important for us to help the city find a way to distinguish itself, attract new money, jobs, and talent than it is for us to try and keep something for the sake of history. I think history is important, but there are better ways to keep your history than to get in the way of progress.