Originally posted by @David Faulkner:
Originally posted by @Account Closed:
Originally posted by @David Faulkner:
You are correct, you don't have to account for jack in any calculations.
I explained it once already and I will attempt to explain it again.
Take a deep breath, you trying too hard to explain. You can always go back and review initial post, although the post highlights the strengths of Baltimore's CF to LA's, it also looks at cumulative CFs and cumulative appreciation over a 10 year period.
So whether you look at total CF or total CF and appreciation, Baltimore was the better buy. At which point you tried to attack the rental growth rate. Someone even suggested using a 10% growth rate for LA despite rent controls... I know before you even go there... not all properties are subject to rent control right? Also moot!
Perhaps what you need to do is present any shred of evidence from a peer reviewed professional publication or journal citing LA (or any city in the LA metro for that matter), to be the top market in the country for investors to go to for cash flow from rental investments. If you can do that in a 2% cap rate environment and 4% - 5% mortgage we wouldn't be talking. That would save you pages of baseless claims.
We are talking about strongest market for rental cash flow, you keep trying to talk about deferred appreciation; these are two different concepts.