All Forum Posts by: John Nachtigall

How is it we have not discussed the true problem here.    All these oxygen breathing earth privileged people thinking they can just "buy" something that is not theirs.   The native chemoliphotrophic microorganisms have all rights to the planet.   Just because it will take millennia for them to develop into to multi-celled organisms does not make them "inferior".   Stop Gentrification of Mars!!!!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithotroph#Chemolithotrophs

Note:   For those with an underdeveloped sense of humor this is what we refer to as sarcasm.  

100% agree @James Wise

I have never understood how this is anything other than a slimy way to take advantage of desperate and less educated people.    In a textbook "subject to" deal...

- The "buyer" gets 100% control of the property by way of the deed

- The "seller" loses the asset but keeps responsibility for the debt.   

-  The "seller also receives a non-enforceable (non-legally binding) promise to pay money equal to the mortgage.   I say it that way specifically because the buyer is not "paying" the mortgage.   They don't assume any legal responsibility for the mortgage.   They promise to pay the seller, which can be rescinded at any time.  

To be ethical both sides have to receive something of value in this contract.   But the seller only receives the illusion of value, in this case relief from the debt.   If the buyer is unable to re-sell or re-rent the house for an appropriate price they have every legal right, per these contracts, to walk away an leave the seller in the same situation minus the deed to the house.    So the buyer can not lose.     

If a defender of this practice wants to impress me, tell me a situation where the renovations and re-sell did not cover the mortgage....or when the re-rental did not cover the mortgage, but they came out of pocket to cover the contract because they promised the seller they would be free of the obligation.   Then I would believe it is legitimate.

@Isaac Johnson

I would suggest that you spend time understanding why people, for example, Dave Ramsey (no debt), Robert Kiyosaki (max leverage and grow), and John Bogel (index funds) advocate for the positions they do.    

One of the primary advantages of youth is the ability to learn from other's experiences.   Rather than trying to think of it as "good" or "bad" it is a more nuanced idea around what it is "good for" or "bad for".   For example, real estate is an excellent investment in terms of leverage.   It is easy to take a 30 year loan and turn a small amount of money into ownership and/or control of a much bigger asset leading to accelerated growth rates.  The thought of doing this with an index fund is laughable.    On the other hand, index funds require no education, no research, no effort, and are very liquid.   Real Estate requires all of those things and is moderately illiquid.  So it is easy to say "I want the asset that maximizes growth", but if you were giving that advice to the entire population, where 60% of the people can't handle a $500 expense without debt, that may not be a very wise idea.   

I would also caution you to consider the idea of selection bias.   When you ask a real estate forum "Which is better, stocks or real estate?" the answer you get back is almost pre-determined.   Just like if you had asked this in a Boglehead forum, except it would be mostly the opposite answer.   I suggest you consider all points of view equally, rather than pre-determine who is right or wrong.   I think you will find that even those with which you end up disagreeing can teach you something.   

The question you should be asking yourself is why some people fear debt and some people embrace it?   Why does real estate work so well for some people and not others?    Why do some people despise stocks and other love them?   In other words, actually learn.   That is my advice

Good Luck

I can understand it.   At great peril to my liberty I have hacked his daily schedule...

8 am:   Wake up in Portugal and be thankful that I achieved my dream of living abroad in a non-extraditable country, Count Money

8-9 am:  Chant with Natalie using crystal to overcome any soul challenge, Count Money

9-10 am:  Shower, Breakfast, read and delete nasty comments on social media, Count Money

10-noon:   Count money, eat lunch (reminder to yell at in-house chef for cooking steak to medium rare vs. rare)

noon-2 pm:  Consult with business and legal team on how to keep the plates spinning so I can Count Money

2-4 pm:  Film new YouTube video sitting on pile of money (off Screen)

4-4:15 pm:  Dodge call from mom asking for bailout for investing in houses, Count Money

4:15-6 pm:   Find a way to sue @James Wise, Count Money

6-8 pm:   Late dinner, meditation session (For minor "soul issues" that don't rise to level of "Soul Challenges", Count Money

8-10 pm:  Read book "Dummies Guide to Hiding Assets", Count Money

You are clearly his 4:15 - 6 pm slot James.     One has to stay organized when you are subject to dozens of lawsuits and investigations at the local, state, and federal level.  

 
You had it.   "Soul Challenge"

http://natalimorris.com/out-of-office-reply/

So much of this scheme was simply kept from him. We have answered for this to the attorney general in three states and in several lawsuits. I don’t care if you believe it or not. It is my soul challenge to share after all, not yours to judge.

Damit James...now I am going to get a copy write suit for posting the link....

Impressive @James Wise, but you have note "really" arrived until you make Natalie's blog where she trashes you while talking about "Life Challenges" and other holistic healing mumbo jumbo.   You have miles to go yet my friend.   

Ouch...taking a shot at my age.   I will have you know we had kilobytes of information per minute that ran through our computer network.  We even had a whole lab of NEXT computers, straight from Steve Jobs himself.   :-)    

Most colleges were liberal long before the internet, free love and the hippies of the 60s are just the safe spaces of today.   And I attended the Colorado School of Mines ('BS '90, MS '94), which has been teaching, among other things, open pit mining and oil extraction for more than a hundred years, I assure you even today no one would recognize it as a "liberal indoctrination camp".   I agree school did not teach me real world engineering.  It did, however, teach me how to think logically, solve problems, and how to behave.    

Speaking of education, in addition to the Millionaire Next Door (great book) I would suggest the Wikipedia article on selection bias.    For example, only looking at the people who didn't go to college and became millionaires, rather than the whole population set which would show that is a very rare occurrence.   What percentage of people without college degrees become millionaires.  I plugged the question into the Google machine....apparently the answer is not a lot.  No degree gives you a much bigger hill to climb.   

https://www.financialsamurai.com/chances-becoming-millionaire-by-race-age-education/

Also 94% of the most powerful people in the US have degrees.  

https://theconversation.com/the-myth-of-the-college-dropout-75760

In the end, however, we agree.   Educate Yourself, Work Hard, and Invest.   I agree wholeheartedly.  There is more than 1 way to do each of those things. 

 A basic examination of data shows that is not true.   College simply pays.  

https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2018/data-on-display/education-pays.htm

I have one of those professions that does not require certification (engineering) and 21 years into my career I am now an accredited investor able in invest legally in the syndications you apparently want to run.   So the question is, what would convince me to give 10s of thousands of dollars to a 19 year old college dropout with no experience, special skills or insight?   Hmmm....I must admit I am having a hard time coming up with an answer, I don't think there is anything you could say that would convince me to do that.  

If you don't want to go to college that is your choice.   But my advice, since you asked, if to a get a job with people who do know about what you want to learn.    For example, CrowdSteet facilitates the syndication of dozens of projects at a time.   They are hiring

https://www.crowdstreet.com/careers/

An entry level position like this Associate Real Estate Analyst is perfect.

https://careers.jobscore.com/careers/crowdstreet/jobs/associate-real-estate-analyst-ccJZCq6Gmr6y6iaKjNoogA?ref=rss&sid=68

Wait, never mind, it requires that "worthless" college degree you don't want. Never mind.

I know I am just a random anonymous voice on a chat forum, but I say this with 100% sincerity.   Allow for the possibility that at 19 years old you are not as smart as you think you are.   5 years ago when you were 14 you thought you had the world figured out, now think about how many things your 14 year old self thought were 100% true and turned out to be different.   At 24 do you think you will look back on 19 and laugh at your naivete?   I am not saying get a degree, formal educational settings are not for everyone.   I am saying that you need to learn from those with more experienced and knowledgeable than you.   If that is not college then it is a job.   A job with an organization where you can observe what it really takes.

I sincerely wish you good luck.   

I checked out the docket for the bankruptcy case and it turns out they entered into a settlement on Sep 16.

https://drive.google.com/open?...

eCHECKit is giving them $350,000 out of a "reserve" account and in exchange the trustee is dropping all further collection attempts (page 5 section 2).   I guess they were not that broke after all.  

erentpayment agreed to drop their claim on the money that was lost in exchange for the trustee dropping their suit against erentpayment for all of the money "lost" when the tenets reversed the transactions (page 6 section 5c).

So it looks like no recovery through the bankruptcy for any landlords out money.    I know there is a class action in Colorado against erentpayment by the landlords, but I don't know the status.   

My take, as a complete non-lawyer amateur, is that the lawyers get paid out of the 350k and very little is left for anything else.  

A similar kind of law was struck down in Seattle.  

https://www.thestranger.com/sl...

I dont think they will be able to show a compelling state interest over landlord’s constructional right to control their property.