All Forum Posts by: Matt L.

My understanding is that rents do not in fact follow appreciation in CA especially due to rent controls otherwise the OP would not be getting a pathetic $2250 on a $460K property. Rent should be closer to $5K.

I hold the same view on all investments. It's value is irrelevant, income is the only measurement of true value. Yes it is easy to access equity and when a investor does he then has money that can be used to generate more income. Income is King, appreciation is the Kings concubine. No value till you pimp it out.

All investment markets rise and fall. Value is cash in hand.  

How on earth is a tiny, probably old, place in Riverside worth $310?  We own a nice house in Victorville built in 2004 with 3 bedrooms and two bathrooms and it is worth approximately $194,000.  

Wealthy Californians loose money out of state?  No here!  I don't feel wealthy with a net worth of $3,900,000 and no debt, but we've done quite well investing out of state.  Our current portfolio of 15 rental houses cost us a total of $1,666,062 and is now worth $2,317,000.  That is a gain of 650,938, or 39%, and they are appreciating.  Gross rentals total $201,960.  Some are owned inside of a 401K plan, reducing taxes.   (Note the $2,500,000 above was a typo.)   Our return on the purchase price is good, but less so on the current value, so we are thinking of buying an apartment building.  Our risk is geographically diversified. 

California also has radical leftist government, a great danger to investors.  I doubt they will actually pass communist healthcare and have it survive a Supreme Court challenge.  If it does go into effect, people with money will flee the state.  I also hope the large increase in gasoline and diesel fuel taxes and the car tax will be ended by the successful recall (I was an early signer of the petition).  Brown is stuck on the bizarre "global warming" hoax.  Trees do not grow to the sky, and California apartment prices are goofy.