Skip to content
×
PRO
Pro Members Get Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
$0
TODAY
$69.00/month when billed monthly.
$32.50/month when billed annually.
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here
Pick markets, find deals, analyze and manage properties. Try BiggerPockets PRO.
x
All Forum Categories
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

All Forum Posts by: Michael Wooldridge

Michael Wooldridge has started 0 posts and replied 481 times.

Quote from @Jim K.:

Something else I'd like to point out that I don't think I made clear up enough in my original post: I would prefer a higher number of more affordable rentals than a lower number of more expensive rentals. It's a given that A-class tenants are generally less sketchy than B-class tenants, and B-class tenants are more reliable than C-class tenants, but there's always a chance in every tenant class that someone's life will go down the toilet bowl, however stable they seem. There's also an additional risk that a luxury rental will empty out suddenly in an economic downturn as people look for more affordable housing. So, I would much rather be sitting on 20 C-class rentals paying $1-1.5K a month than 5 luxury rentals paying $4-6K a month when a local plant closes its doors or they start jumping out of windows on Wall Street.

So this is an interesting comment. I’m focuses on targeted vacation rentals these days, so the classification is tougher in my mind due to scale of market but I fall into probably B-type. More scalable not as messy as the multi-million but they are still newer/updated properties.

I can see why some might to go C-Class if you were in high CF, low capital regions Cleveland, Pitt etc.. But I feel like that also comes with headaches - c-class means tenants might not pay which can be more work than vacancy (they get hit harder by inflation or local plant closes. 

Smaller set of properties for me is less management, less maitenance, and usually the capital isn’t the same % increase when compared to the extra cash flow. Meaning For the same downpayment on 2 c-class, I can buy 1 A/B that cash flows 3.5 to 4.5 C class.

Granted some of that is cash flow.

In the end though I’m not sure I want 60-80 C-class to manage, especially into retirement as I do 15-20 A/B Class. Also, the appreciation returns are far better. 

It’s all give and take but interesting how people view the numbers long term. 




 

For me it’s less a unit number than income. My rough ballpark number is about about $30k monthly net. I can retire early and still pay down the properties and build an equity fund long term for the kiddos. I have huge concerns about AI long term so want some income offsets for the kids down road. 

But mine number is essentially my income replacement. Can continue to invest and live without working to 65.

Hmm anybody want to bet on bank run tomororw on FRC? 

https://www.cryptopolitan.com/...

Quote from @Jay Thomas:

It's hard to fathom that an idea like only keeping 250k in each bank would be seriously considered. Real estate investments are often done with syndicators, who pool together money from many investors. It just doesn't make sense for them to have 20 separate bank accounts - it's too much work and makes the investment process even more complicated than it already is! Growing up in Cupertino (Silicon Valley), I always held Silicon Valley Bank in high regard as a good institution catering to the high-tech industry. Perhaps what they needed at the time was some real estate loans tied to prime on their books. That way, they could provide a service that catered to their customers while also allowing them to keep more funds available at any given time. Real estate investments are often long-term, so having more funds readily available makes sense for any business.


Well there is no doubt mortgages would have helped their books. That’s been an on-going discussion because it’s consistent income stream. ultimately their approach to treasuries and not backing off on some of them was the other end of it. 

Finally end of day if something like what Thiel caused - happens to any bank - they pretty much could all fold right away. BEcause it wasn’t just the PE firms yanking but all their companies they invested in. IT’s hard to survive when the bank run is a huge amount of companies yanking their money out all in one day.

 

Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:
Quote from @Michael Wooldridge:

I take advantage of capitalism all the time but this is one area I absolutely disagree with you on. Uncheck capitalism is just bad especially if there is no penalty for crashing a sector or economy if you walk away with a few hundred million for taking the delayed risks. Also separately at some point capital gains need to be a progressive tax over a certain number. 

I certainly agree that illegal gains should be punished, but Govt overreach is already severely out of control.

Oh, and there should be no capital gains tax at all.


 On a serious note. 

Doesn't it seem a bit obvious, and simple to connect Capital Gains Tax to capital positioning? 

Parked capital get's taxed

RE-DEPLOYED Capital Gains get rewarded with a taxation deferment, with forgiveness if deployed for a minimum of ____ time. 

Seems almost too simple. 

#1 problem with "wealth" in the U.S. is not the actual concentration of wealth in hand's of 2%. It's that the wealth concentrates, and sits. It just goes there and stops there, a cul-de-sac of wealth. 

So, INCENTIVISE to not end it's flow in a cul-de-sac. Duh. 

Would that not appease BOTH the "tax-the-rich" crowd and the "love the rich" crowds?     

With this, could put Capital Gains Tax at 40%. Capital will keep in the flow. 

AND convey a foreign earnings tax exclusion for repatriation of capital that if deployed into domestic deployment in ___ time-frame, again, tax deferment, with forgiveness if deployed for ___ time. This get's it BACK into U.S. and KEEPS it into U.S. investments. 

So this is a line of thinking I could get behind. I would say parked capital shoudl have some allowed limit .i.e. don’t destroy general population 401k. And on that note we’d probably have to defined what parked vs deployed capital is. But it’s an interesting path to discuss. 
Quote from @J Scott:
Quote from @Michael Wooldridge:
I didn’t really expected idiots like Thiel to cause SVB collapse though.

Follow the money. 

Where did billions of dollars from SVB go in the days following the collapse?

Brex. 


Who is a significant investor in Brex?

One guess...

I’m in tech. I’m very aware of why (how he benefits) and how he also went outside to other PE firms to do it. The fact that he is going to get away with it blows my mind. I’m also not real sure why Signature had fast buy for assets but SVB does not from banking. PE Firms will make a fortune off of causing a crash and then buying up the assets. 

It’s beyond frustrating that regulators aren’t stepping in on this.

 

All that said between credit suisse and now FRC again today. I’ll say the banking system defaults have me more and more concerned. If liquidity drys up your predictions could come true. 


And Csuisse was one of the big call outs I had lats year as an outside risk to the system. I didn’t really expected idiots like Thiel to cause SVB collapse though. And now it looks like the PE firms will be buying up SVB - such a joke.

Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:
Quote from @Michael Wooldridge:

The two are not mutually exclusive, dude. I supported his post because overall it was brilliant. I don't believe I ever said that 'Real Estate was bad to invest', ever....because that has always been my go-to game. I recall saying that I would wait to invest until prices dropped. The two are not even close to being the same, unless someone has a severe reading/comprehension problem....

And I also never said y'all were 'nuts'. So please show me those quotes from me, because one of us is making s**t up.....



Lol ok overreaction much? I was multitasking not nuts just implied that buying last year or in 2023 was bad. I never said RE was bad just that buying at the time was bad. And my specific example was a property I settled on in October which is cash flowing quite nicely. 

Anyway the point being is you were against the comments that investing now is bad because prices would drop. 

 

Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Michael Wooldridge:
Quote from @Bruce Woodruff:

@James Hamling My man, that was so well said. I especially took note of the following comments:

"The Fed VERY CLEARLY said from the start exactly what they were going to do with rates. They said what there target was, that they would keep fighting inflation via rate hikes until they hit that goal"

"I will give a F about SVB AFTER every small business lost during moratorium get's a bail-out for the exact $ there business was worth the day before moratoriums"


Well said but weren’t you calling for housing market values resetting 7-8 month ago? his whole post argues against the idea of housing values dropping. 
 


 Me? Housing prices 'resetting", as in back to pre-covid? No, never have said anything of the sort. 

Fall '22' I forecasted a market Consolidation Event over winter '22'/'23', with median home prices stepping back 7-14% on national average, with localized market specific deviations ranging as high as +/- 30%, market specific dependent.  

And with that i detailed how winter markets have a normalized "step-back" action so in many markets it would be a "more normal" market cycle. But most on BP called me nutz, argued the sky was falling, no way prices would hold, that everything would collapse and crumble and we were on verge of a huge discount buying spree. Well, here we are, what are the #'s.    Turn's out what people called me nutz for was actually a bit pessimistic because results were even stronger than I forecasted.     I did accurately forecast the volume collapse, which was a primary driver to people arguing with me saying I made no sense forecasting such a big volume drop but prices holding so strong at same time, people said not possible. Well, obviously was because that's exactly how it happened. 

Bit a "reset", lol, no, 2019 is long gone and never coming back. That's always been the reality. 

Now going forward, Oh-Man this is "the" most epic of uncertainty. I would coin this chapter "Zeus's Decision" because we will experience massive differences all decided upon what comes down from "Mount Olympus" and the "God's Of $". 

They could choose to abandon inflation focus, press on economic strength, even actions that act as liquidity injection, feed wage inflation, and let things run "hot" justifying it as facilitating maximum velocity of the market to allow the market find it's equilibrium. I doubt this direction but, there is lot's of political pressure for it. 

Or, it could be "damn the warning bells, FULL SPEED AHEAD" and as inflation readings come out which by all forecast measure is considerably higher than J-Pow's desire, jest keep drawing the noose tighter and tighter, strangling the life out of the middle-class, until inflation falls into his "happy-zone" at the expense that things could be in cardiac arrest to do so, and than it's a tail-spin, so than they start injecting liquidity rapidly, and "shizam" we have a bi-polar on-off, hot-cold, economic cycle of big swings. 

I think the later is more probable. 

But we also have major election cycle, and telegraphing already of major political meddling, so what new x-factors will that bring. 

This is going to be a very interesting ride for sure. I am not willing to make any forecast as of yet, and I and those around me say "oh wow, you the "Oz" who predicts the un-predictable, will dare a call on the most wild of call, not willing to even say anything, holly-cow that's not good", yeah, exactly. When it's too big a jump for Evil Knievel to even dare, that's saying something. 

I do know this, I would NOT want to be dollar heavy, NO WAY! And, NOT in margin on a brokerage account, uh-uh. Follow what the big $ is doing, and they are racing into ASSETS.    I have NEVER, in all my decades in Real Estate and investing, ever seen or heard of the kind of capital deployment into assets I am seeing now. TODAY.    

Investing alone does not justify these kind of levels, especially not at these returns. This is a "life-boat" action, this is about securitization more than returns. 

All this talk about SVB and $ leaving it for last while, has anyone asked where that $ has gone? Where it was going? Here's a fun fact, look up the Real Estate holdings by some of big names of silicon valley, yeah that may shock some. And that's just what you can find. Anyone curious how many millions meta dumped in R.E.? Anyone interested why Bezos is a R.E. billionaire now? Doesn't it seem odd that tech is moving capital into R.E.? Why oil is moving $ into R.E.? Why every sector/investor of big $ is moving capital into R.E.? 


You are confusing my point Bruce was one of the folks arguing that prices would reset and that you, Carlos and i were nuts for saying they would not.

Of which he admitted actually today. anyway wasn’t meant as a jab to him but I found it interesting he was so supportive eof your post when he kept claiming RE was bad to invest and housing would reset on prices.
 

Quote from @Carlos Ptriawan:
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Carlos Ptriawan:
Quote from @Carlos Ptriawan:
Quote from @J Scott:
Quote from @Carlos Ptriawan:

It doesn't matter what you call it.

That's where we disagree.  Words do matter.  Because different words mean different things.

There's a reason why we have separate terms for open market operations (OMO) and quantitative easing (QE).

It's impossible to have a nuanced conversation about economics if you refuse to acknowledge that.

So, with that said, I'm out...  I'll leave it to you guys to debate.  Have a great day, gentlemen!


 the more money available to the public, is QE.

so we have interest rate going lower, Fed asset increases, M2 also increased in this past week alone, real estate has two months uptick in a row.

FRB, in other hands, has been saved by Wells Fargo and BAC :-) this is very cool approach to save the bank.


 to clearly describe my point, I have to insert the chart again LOL.


 Carlos, I think you need to take a few steps back and draw things out in Crayola for people to understand, because I don't think they get what all this means. 

What is inflation? It's when the individual notes in your pocket/account buy less. 

this chart simply means the Fed inflation fighting era is over and we slowly moving to new QE era LOL

especially after this weekend announcement that all central bank in the world has access to USD via swap liquidity.

The Fed has failed my friend LOL

And it's extremely predictable as I've suggested 8 months ago lol that guy powell is too much obsessed with inflation


Didn’t mind his obsession with inflation. But I hated the fact that he ignored the laws of supply and demand - in particular around housing and jobs. Not enough houses and not enough people to fill jobs. Unless you crash the economy you weren’t going to use rates to fix this.

It is good we have higher rates overall though to slow growth. But lets hope he isn’t an idiot this week.