All Forum Posts by: Account Closed

Write offs?

You mean the person can spend dollars and get a credit so that they pay a bit less in tax. In other words they trade whole dollars for pennies back.

The write offs come from the money spend on deductible expenses.

RE investors get better write offs. They can deduct paper losses without spending money.

People should deduct everything they can legally deduct. If people want more deducts make me a loan, I will default and you can write it off.

There are no Mac applications that I know of at this time. I have been a Mac user for a while. I once worked for Steve Jobs at NeXT so I am also a bit technical.

Two possible solutions. One is the one you mentioned where you will be running Windows on the Mac hardware. There are a few ways to do so. All require you to own a copy of Windows but you do not need more.

Or you use something that is platform independent. Ryan has suggested a web based solution. That can work really well. Good if you happen to be traveling around and you are not near your computer.

There are a few people who have solutions that are Excel based. Spreadsheets that run through the numbers. Some very good alternatives.

The spreadsheet alternatives do not produce great reports with photos and other things. Most people do not care but some want to produce a package for a lender or other investors.

The Apple.com site tends to list the major packages that are out there. Every now and then people release a package for the Mac and some aspect of RE. Mostly related to management or other things. You can contact the vendors to see if they are planning any future products and if they want a beta tester. That is some times a great way to help get certain features into a package.

Mike,

I was not saying that something belonging in the off-topic areas is not important. Sorry if you were confused by my suggestion. No offense was implied by saying we are getting pretty far from the main focus of the forum.

Tell me how a recession will impact OH? When was OH as a state doing really well? The 2000 elections features OH a lot as there were so many unemployed.

In some ways OH missed the boom so could it be that a recession will have much less of an impact. If the central bankers were the ones pumping up the economy and causing the housing boom how did some parts of the US miss out?

Detroit started down years ago. Long before any recession. Charlotte NC, Seattle WA and Portland OR are all up according to the Case Shiller index. Their economies were not all that strong earlier in the century so they are still rising (all of 2007).

My point is a recession is not evenly felt. There was a recession in 2001 in the US. Much of the US hardly noticed while other parts (Portland and Charlotte for two) felt it a lot. Similar for Silicon Valley.

The last US recession did not impact the UK or many other countries. Maybe it was just too small of a recession in the US.

If we want to debate central banks and fiat money we can do so but that would not be a discussion really on topic.

As someone who thinks there are serious problems yet is aggressively expanding your RE portfolio what are you doing to hedge or otherwise protect your position? As you focus in a specific area of the US would you vary your strategy if you lived and owned property in another market?

James,

Back on topic...

What does this mean?

All residential prices?

Only the prices but not the values?

Or are some down 100% while others are down 0% so the average is 50%?

Or it is there are some communities that are down 50% while the CA as a state (not the city of CA) is down nothing like the headline?

I find that some people use headlines that grab you but lack substance.

I am very sure there are specific houses that can be found to match the numbers. The problem is no one house represents the full state of CA. For CA to be down that much says something pretty dramatic that the data does not seem to back up.

Comments?

Good example Mike.

Clearly a bit different than what some assume they must do.

Josh,

I am not sure I understand the question.

Where do you draw the line?

Calling the police, suggesting shelters or other community services that can offer support, etc.

What are you suggesting you can do as a landlord that was not something you already do?

BK where a borrower (person or company) can restructure their debt is allowed. A home and the debt is not included.

A BK where a borrower is freed of their debts and the assets are liquidates is a different alternative.

Lenders are allowed to restructure loans with a borrower. I read the bill as a way to allow someone in BK to restructure a home loan (not wipe it out or otherwise reduce the debts) as similar to a BK restructuring.

There is logic to the lenders being able to stop a foreclosure through a restructure. The problem with loans sold on into MBS is there are restrictions or confusion as to what can be restructured.

Some borrowers can honestly afford to pay some of all of the debt if the terms are changed to better match what they can pay vs. what the ARM might require after a reset.

People should be responsible for what they borrow. The US BK facilities are there to protect all as an orderly restructuring can be better than a fire-sale when demand is not there for what is being sold.

There really are two sides to the conversation.

Some of Wall Street is against this as some trades are really bets using an index that loans will default. If the default rate is reduced then the investors will lose money as they are betting on rising defaults. This is not bad but it is not the same as the lenders holding the bonds who do want to restructure.

The messy part is the fact that the proposed changes are after the fact. The idea that the rules could change after the deals have been down does damage those who based their decisions on conditions and regulations as they stood at the time.

Toby,

There is a prevailing attitude that long term buy and hold investors need to focus on the cash flow. Appreciation is assumed to be zero. 2% rule of thumb being the test case.

If people are in development or other aspects of the business the numbers are different and different variables drive the return.

If people are 'breaking even' on a monthly basis (common strategy in high priced markets) they are seen as being speculators as they do need positive appreciation before there is a return on the investment. While many have speculated for years or decades it is not a sure thing and seen as less than really investing by many on BP.

I tend to advocate that people need to understand what works in the local market and why it works. Different strategies for different markets. Cash flow, appreciation, ability to force equity through refurbishment, better deal making (short sales, wholesale and other things that are not really buy and hold) can all be used if that is what the market will support and you really know you can ride out corrections.

So, when seeking advice as to what people do understand it comes with a bias which can be very much a reflection of the market they operate in. Some BP investors are very used to being in a market where the population peaked 10 or 20 years ago so appreciation is very much diminished compared to states where the demographics are more positive.

Tangent for a second: When on Liffe who were you trading for?

The notice is the notice.

Use it as it is defined for you legal jurisdiction. No modifications. Complete it correctly. You want the judge to recognize the notice and to consider it valid. You do not want a legal aid attorney claiming the notice was defective.

There is nothing to stop a landlord from sending or posting an additional document that offers solutions. Indicating how they should contact you, what they can do to settle, etc. Just tell them that until an agreement is reached the notice still stands and they will face a court ordered eviction if they do not address the complaint in the notice.

The key problem with the bill is as follows:

There is some logic to changing a loan after the fact. That is what BK court is all about. Working out a repayment plan rather than forcing a fire sale. There is some logic to the bill. Better to work out a repayment plan with a borrower who has some capacity to pay than to force a sale into a down market. Note that lenders already can do this if they wanted to. One complication can be if the loan was resold it is not clear if the new buyer is open to a restructuring.

The bill was also narrowed to apply only to loans already in place so no home loans made going forward.

I can see both sides. Changing things after the fact is normally bad as too many decisions could be impacted without warning. Encouraging more lenders to restructure and providing a legal framework to do so even when the loans were sold on might be the best idea.