All Forum Posts by: Amit M.

@Carlos Ptriawan that’s interesting. Can you provide a link or reference?

@David Mayman yes that is correct...I was going to tell you (but you beat me to it) to look up previous cases where the “temporary rent discount” was challenged, as I knew it failed in SF. Curious, did you see any other similar cases in other CA rent controlled jurisdictions?

@Carlos Ptriawan yes I agree. Especially these last few years with interest rates being so low for so long, every decent asset class has seen cap rate compression for several years. Which is why paying down debt seems especially compelling these days. 

@Carlos Ptriawan to add to what you're saying, if an investor has a mix of properties (great ones and lesser ones) and they are looking to streamline, they could sell the less desirable ones, pay the gain taxes, and use the proceeds to pay down/off the loans on the most desirable properties they want to keep long term. If their interest rate is 4% on those, then they are "making" the equivalent rate of return (4%) as the DST scenario you outlined above. The big difference? zero risk, there is absolutely zero risk when you pay off existing debt :)

@Mike Jacobson as always, I appreciate your updates here. Not sure how you'd go about starting a peer DST group, but this thread is a good resource as it gets constantly updated. Maybe some of the other active DST investors following this thread can also provide updates on how their investments are performing.

As I’ve mentioned in the past, I’m always contemplating when I may shift out of my active RE investments and into something more passive. My future options are either keeping what I’ve got and getting a PM to manage all daily activities, 1031 into STNL, and/or DSTs. This year I am wrapping up my final value add project, and will pretty much go into a more passive wealth maintenance/preservation mode, as opposed to wealth creation. I’m not planning on making any asset changes until we’re through covid and back to more normal times. I’m hoping that by summer 2022 we will be getting there. Concurrently there is a huge value-wise as well as strategic realignment happening in almost all commercial sectors and we have yet to see who the long term winners will be. We are definitely in a “may you live in interesting times” time.

@Cory Thorbeck no it’s not inaccurate, and I don’t appreciate your condescending attitude. I know all about the ghost ship. Main point is that both situations are serious fire hazards, when significant and blatant misuse of illegal sleeping areas/room are made from structures not designed for that high capacity of use. 

I’ve also wondered if the liquefaction zones can expand, and also how accurate the maps really are...meaning if you’re 1-2 blocks away, is that really accurate? I don’t think there is much data on this, at least non that I could find searching online.
Only anecdotal info I have is that I have a bldg 1-2 blocks away from minor liquefaction area. When we dug up the sewer line lateral years ago the ground 6’ deep was dry. By chance a nearby corner lot was dug 10-15’ deep for a new construction project. So I took a careful look, and yep, the ground was wet on that lot...and it’s supposed to be on the “dry” side. So...who the hell really knows ;(

I agree with Brian. In the marketplace you’ll usually see 2/1’s being illegally changed to 3/2s, which still has risk,  but at least is a more common occurrence. But taking a 2/1 and adding 8 illegal bedrooms and 6 illegal baths!?!  That’s seriously No Bueño!

That could lead to ALOT of trouble. It’s a serious habitability and fire hazard (google Oakland ghost ship). city could easily construe this as an illegal attempt to make a boarding home, etc. which can definitely lead to big fines, and having to dismantle everything.

I’d run away!

@Matt R.

said

———-

3words

^ nailed it...no pun intended