All Forum Posts by: Mike Nuss

Join the RareBird Investor Network on Thursday, June 27 at 9 AM for our master class, When Disaster Strikes – Preparing and Navigating Property Insurance Claims and Restoration. Rudi Suminski with Omni and Triad Pacific will teach you how to be prepared for when disaster strikes. In this class, you will learn how to…

• Save money – Minimize Damage and Repairs
• Save time – Shorten Repair Time and Insurance Repayment
• And Save your soul – Learn the Rules of Engagement with Insurance Reps and Restoration Contractors

CE Certificates are available for licensed attendees.

Space is limited, so please RSVP using the link here: http://rarebirdinvestors.com/masterclass/

Our Master Classes are designed as deep-dive educational opportunities for our RareBird Investor Network Members!

New to the Investor Network? Come and check out a meeting, your first time is always FREE! OR Join Here: https://rarebirdinvestors.com/join/

@Michael Kay I used to believe this too, but experienced has changed my beliefs, as expected. I would say having 100 conversations is >>>>> than writing 100 offers. 

I've written 6 offers this year, which has resulted in 5 closed deals and 2 in escrow (yes, one conversation just turned into a deed, there wasn't even an offer, just drawing up a jv agreement and a deed based on a conversation from last summer). 

#'s are important, but being effective with your activity is much more so. Don't waste your time, make sure you know what you're offering is in the ball park before you take the time to even write it. Don't throw darts at a board you can't see. 

Hey @Brett Chandler keep analyzing deals is some great advice. Always be looking so you know what a good deal is when you see one. 

I'd add in another, work on your mindset. Please take this as constructive criticism, but your post is full of limiting beliefs, with this being the biggest "I don't have the time to commit to a rehab until all my kids are in school (4 more years)."

Life won't get any easier when your kids are in school, I know, I have two of them. I would challenge you to reframe that statement in a way that empowers you rather than limits you. That will go longer than anything else you do. Investing is more about mindset than anything else. 

@Jacob Papp onlineed is a local Portland company. Proschools is another highly used company. Most online education is very similar, both in format and content. I use onlineed because it's local. 

@Todd Powell awesome, sounds like it will be worth the cost either way. I hope it ends well, let us know the end result and good luck!

I must be getting old and cranky @Jesse Rivera :)

@Jacob Papp I suggest reading Oregon Real Estate Agency definition of "real estate activity". Having a license may or may not protect. If you are building a buyer's list (as gurus teach), and then sending out a mass email about a wholesale......well I would construe that as marketing. If you do not have a license, that violates Oregon REA "real estate activity" requirements. Even at that point, if you have a license, and do not have an agreement to market, the license won't protect you because you cannot market a property you do not have an agreement with the owner to market. 

So it doesn't come down to a license, it comes down to your activity. It's very possible to assign a property without marketing it. If you're an active real estate investor, you have a network, you have friends and you can end up assigning something without marketing it. But to be fully protective against the law, close on the property and then resell the property. That's the only fool proof way to stay out of court.

That being said, wholesalers violate the law on a daily basis in Oregon. It's a complaint driven system so if you don't get complaints there is a low likelihood you'll get caught violating the law.  Hence wholesaling still exists as a business model for some. 

For me it comes down to morals and intent. Many wholesalers use crappy one page contracts and they never have intent to close on the property. Their only intent is to close "if" they find a buyer willing to close. That's real estate activity in a nut shell. They don't put up earnest money or put up very little insignificant amounts of earnest money and have contracts with open ended due diligence periods. This can put the property owner in a terrible position. A broker at my brokerage bought a property, and the owner lost quite a bit of $, because he had to close within 2 days. Reason he got a great deal and the owner got screwed, was because an immoral wholesaler had the property tied up for months at a price way too high (that "deal" came across my desk 4-5 times over a 3-4 month period of time because it was being marketed). There was never any possibility of closing. The owner had non refundable 40K earnest money already spent in another market. They absolutely had to sell their house to avoid losing that 40K. If the wholesaler acted ethically, they would've backed out of the agreement way ahead of time, which would've given the owner the ability to go to the open market, not risk their 40K and sell the property for more. Instead, those actions lead to a highly motivated seller having to lower their price substantially to offset the risk associated with buying that specific property. It sucks, yet it happens all the time. 

@Alan Grobmeier taking an opinion article, written by an uneducated landlord as law, is a big reason so much misinformation gets spread. The link you gave would fall in the category of “fake news”. 

The proposed ordinance does not force you to change your screening criteria. In fact, my management company made our criteria more strict over the past few months because of many changes in state/city regulation. The only less restrictive change we will have to make, if (when) the ordinance passes, will be a cap on minimum income requirements. Other than that we can still operate how we want to operate when it comes to screening criteria.

When it comes to discrimination against felons, every state falls into that category thanks to HUDs ruling on disparate impact. A flat out blanket “no criminal history allowed” screening requirement already violates federal law. Portland’s proposed “low barrier” criteria (which is a choice to accept, but not a requirement) in regard to criminal background aligns with feds ruling on disparate impact. If you flat out do not allow criminals, I suggest you read up on the law and stop taking opinion articles as gospel. That might save you from a law suit.

One other piece of misinformation...Seattle’s first come first serve law was repealed shortly after passing, over a year ago now. Portland’s proposed ordinance has been changed to allow for “best approved” and doesn’t mandate “first approved”. 

Again, I’m not supporting the change, just brining facts to the table as you stated quite a few false statements in your post.

As I said in my original post, managing and owning rentals will be more difficult and that increased difficulty will and does create opportunity.  You don’t have to invest here, but honestly, spreading rumors doesn’t help anybody. Education on law will always be better than ignorance to law. 

@Will F. and @Matt R. stated why Oregon's passing of rent control will allow me to retire earlier, if I choose to retire. Many investors that owned real estate pre rent control, in rent controlled markets, are very happy they waited it out and didn't rush to sell. The reactionary types, acting out of fear, are missing the boat. But that's fine, I'll be happy to come in and thrive off of their emotions. 

Honestly, I think people can open their minds a little bit more on the whole rent control topic (not saying I'm pro rent control, just saying an open mind is a good thing). 

Opportunities are created when laws change. To each their own, but I will have one of my best years yet thanks to Oregon passing their state wide rent control. It's just a matter of how you look at it. Yes, long term holding in these markets will now have its challenges, but ignoring opportunities that are created from such changes is an ignorant move. Change your proformas, make your offers different, don't ignore what can still be done successfully. Take advantage of the market while it's figuring itself out with these changes. 

@Tris Wils yep, that totally makes sense. If it is in Portland, you'll also save about 40Kish in SDC fees with a remodel versus a new build.....so if you can get an income stream it may just be a wash in the end. Also, since it will be a demolition or massive remodel, you'll be able to terminate a lease given our new rent control environment in Oregon. That's a huge bonus right there. 

If you wanted to do "events", you'll need a conditional use permit to stay legal. 

side note, the 70s to 90s are the worst eras for construction. Early 2000's as well. Either crazy designs that have high maintenance costs or no character and quickly dated finishes. Sounds like a fun project if you decide to go that route. Good luck.