All Forum Posts by: Joffrey Long

These can be a real headache.

I believe that Associates Financial may have been acquired by Ford Credit.

However, you're in better shape than I've been in many times as you at least have something you can trace. These were both big corporations, and I'm sure that if you look up the states they were incorporated in, and do some Google searching for where those companies went, you'll find out who bought the company that bought the company that bought them, and whoever the ultimate successor in interest is can give you info.

You might also want to search "Corporate Wiki" and "White Pages.com"

I've had old unreleased liens from private parties.......DEAD private parties. Now THAT's a real challenge.

Joffrey

Hendrix,

I've had both, SFR and Multi-Unit. I think if you talk to 10 great investors, five of them will swear by SFR and five of them will swear by multi-unit. They're most likely all correct.

I think it depends on what you have an eye for and what appeals to you most. (I agree with James Hamlin on his point above.) I lean toward SFR, I have both SFR and multi- but mostly SFR.

I kind of like the larger number of people and more possessions SFR tenants have - makes it harder to move. Apartment tenants can rent a truck, gets some buddies over to help them move, buy a couple of six-packs - and boom, Sunday at 4pm YOU have a new vacancy. Not quite that easy for house tenants. I LOVE garages (where are they going to move all that stuff?) and pets, since it's harder to move if you have pets.

Also, I kind of like the luxury of no interaction between tenants. "His truck is too big and I can't open my car door." Best one ever: "He practices drums at 7:00am!"

Hope this helps,

Joffrey

Seth,

I think your question is GREAT.

I'll chime in after 36 years of real estate investing, and feeling successful at it over the last 18, but having had many not-successful years. (And man, some REALLY bad real estate stuff - I mean B. A. D.)

Most important thing I ever learned investing in real estate is how much I don't know. I'm forever humbled by the many new things I continue to learn.

Big turning point for me in real estate investing was when I really sat down and defined a long term plan and then focused everything I did from that day on (in real estate investing) on working that plan.

(OH - I'm personally not smart enough to have figured that out - another guy was doing that and I copied him.)

Before that, I went helter-skelter from deal to deal, a real gunslinger, buying this, selling that, "oh - there's another deal ! Wait a minute, maybe we could exchange!" No plan, no clue - I'd change directions before and after lunch! It was madness.

Things got way better after the change, though. The most telling sign was through the last downturn. Sure, I lost some equity, but overall, I didn't "miss a meal," and am now better off than I was going into the downturn.

For whatever it's worth, that was my big lesson. I do observe many people in real estate investing with great questions, like, "What do you think of duplexes?" or "Hey, what about Riverside - do you think Riverside is a good investment?"

And the answer can only be a number of questions, about their plans, their overall belief about the market, their goals, their investable dollars, their tolerance for risk, and most important, their big, long term plan - and unfortunately many of them are like I was - they have no master plan.

Does this help at all? I guess I really feel that I've been both people you asked about, the unsuccessful r.e. investor and the successful r.e. investor.

Great question, Seth.

Joffrey

Sandy,

I agree with Loren. People get overly upset about UBIT, and for the money you stand to make on flips, go for it.

The most important thing, in my opinion, is to follow all the other little rules about self directed IRAs.

For some of your IRA/401k funds, consider investing in trust deeds, in whatever area you are in. Not as exciting or profitable as flips, but will give you some higher returns, and first trust deeds provide a somewhat safer way to get higher returns.

It's too early in the morning for me to work a clever "Mitt" comment into this, but I think Jon and Loren handled that pretty well!

Joffrey

Deville,

I can relate to your question - have been in the same position of choosing many times.

I think there is a correct answer to your question. The problems is, to find the correct answer, you have to know where real estate prices are going.

Under option A, you would have more security, less work, and could ease your way into more property. If the market flattened or declined, you might be safer.

Under option B, if the market keeps going up, you'll make a lot more. Also, if you don't buy all 3 properties, and the market goes up and keeps going up, you won't be able to go back and get the 3 deals you can get now.

I'm in SF Valley / Los Angeles, and we make hard money loans in both Riverside and San Bernardino, so I know how depressed your prices got. As you know, when there's a shortage of property, your area goes up.

Also, in your area, you're buying BELOW replacement cost, so the new tract of homes down the street can't compete with you.

Part of your decision probably depends on your other assets, income, debts, and your ability to maybe hang in there if you buy 3 and the market flattens for a few years.

Hope that helps,

Joffrey

Alex,

I'm a hard money lender and I'd be the first to say I don't think hard money, especially the terms they're offering, is a good idea.

It's generally not good to put all your chips on one deal and one needed outcome. If you tie up with 6, 18 or even 24 month financing, as the others said, you might not qualify to get out of it.

Accumulate more, build up assets. I like the idea of shifting your pay over to W-2 - in addition to qualifying, you might avoid some other nasty issues. My understanding is that they're really going after 1099 people who they can re-classify as employees.

Best of luck,

Joffrey

I'm interested in the opinions of BP members:

As far as CALIFORNIA FIRST TRUST DEEDS (not Texas loans, not 2nd trust deeds) what have you experienced, heard, what are your opinions, and what do you believe the general beliefs are?

DISCLOSURE: I'm in the business, my company provides hard money loans and people invest with us. The purpose of this thread is to actually GAIN information about what the market (as known by PB participants) thinks of this particular investment. No one who posts will be contacted or bugged. Thank you for your input!!!!!

Joel, Steve and others:

Thanks so much for your responses.

Jeff, thanks for the valid California input, and especially the mention of Mr. Norris, my mentor.

Here's something that relates to how I work, and how many of my hard money colleagues work, that may differ from some of what you've heard of or observed.

The concept of "loan to own." Yes, many hard money lenders have gone that route, and it's had horrific effects on our market, laws, and reaped havoc on our industry.

Truth is, that for many of us, who are more conservative hard money lenders, our business model NEVER makes money when the borrower defaults.

Yes, you heard me right. Of course, if we have a 300,000 loan on a house that's dropped in value to 325,000, we're going to lose money.

But what if we have a $150,000 first trust deed on a house that's worth 300,000. If we foreclose are we going to make a killing on our "loan to own?"

No, because if you've attempted to bid on any 150,000 first td foreclosures on 300,000 houses (even in a much worse market) there's bidders and all you get as the first trust deed holder is your principal, interest, late charges and advances. NOTHING for all the extra time/effort for monitoring a foreclosure, dealing with bankruptcy counsel, etc., etc.

So when we say our best world would be if we never filed another foreclosure, we're "truthin."

Again, there are those cowboys who really think that making hard money loans is a way to acquire property - but if you meet one of them, turn 180 degrees and RUN.

Joffrey Long

Hey, welcome to a great industry. I started at 18 as well.

You've got some GREAT advice from the previous posts, so you're on your way. I will say that at age 55, with 37 years licensed experience, it is good to have started early. Many of the people with as many years experience as I are either too old to work, and some of them, well.....they're not even alive.

One tip I didn't see in all the posts: A BIG ITEM MANY PEOPLE OF ALL AGES MISS IN GETTING INTO REAL ESTATE:

It's a SALES business. You can like houses, have nice outfits, be interested in helping people, bla bla bla, but if you don't develop SALES skills, it won't happen. Get caught up in all the grandeur of being a "REALTOR" and you might miss the big item, SELLING.

Some of the real estate companies MAY offer some sales training, or something they call sales training, but look around, make sure you talk to successful people and find out where to get good sales training.

Looking back...........if I could change something, I'd have shifted my focus for the first four or five years into LEARNING SOLID sales skills, instead of just obsessing full time on the next deal.

Welcome to the industry,

Joffrey

Beau,

First, I have to compliment you on a GREAT post. What a great question to ask.

Next, from what you said, it's my belief that you're already on the right track.

Ann Bellamy pretty much shares my view - I have experienced that it's best to pretty much never sell anything, although there are a few properties that after years, just didn't fit the long term plan, so an occasional sale maaaaaaaaaaay be ok.

Next, she said "buy more properties faster." On that, I fundamentally agree, but buying too fast, like eating too fast (both which I'm experienced in) can hurt you.

John Chapman - you asked Ann to elaborate and she hasn't yet, so I'll put in my 3 cents worth:

Here goes:

I started investing in residential property in 1975. Due to the "mentorship" of someone who had more money then, but ultimately failed and became poor, I "churned," bought, sold, traded, oh boy. Lots of activity, but after the downturn of the early 90's, I had lost a lot of property for the SECOND time, and was darn (is it ok to say darn here?) discouraged that I was working my _ _ _ off but not getting anywhere.

Then, I looked at a buddy of mine, same age, same middle class background, but he had simply trudged away on a buy and hold basis.

Now, my buddy has 4 residences. (No, not rentals, we'll get to that - these are NICE houses sitting there empty and furnished in case he wants to go to the beach, the suburb, the desert or downtown San Fran.) Plus, he's got another nice goodie - 35 almost paid for rental houses and a 10 unit.

Needless to say, I'm glad I adopted his program about 18 years ago, and it's been all good since. Not quite as flush as my pal, but no complaints.

Hope that helps. Sorry for the long post, but it's certainly been a LONG road.

Good luck, and my compliments again on a very fine question. No doubt why you're able to pull down 250k a year in whatever you're doing.

Joffrey