All Forum Posts by: Account Closed

Yes, you can change the name. The secretary of state's office can explain the process.

But, if you have a DBA why would you do that? Unless there is something funny about TX, you can use the DBA on stationary, cards, contracts, etc as long as it is a validly registered DBA. That is the purpose of the DBA.

However, I would rethink the new name you have chosen. If you ever seek financing, you have a whole bunch of red flags right there in the name.

Tonja,

Whether your potential tenants are "all too often criminals and convicted felons" has a lot to do with the type of properties you choose for your portfolio. If you choose low end, low rent properties the chances of dealing with that part of society goes up.

I would recommend you not choose those types of properties. Look for things in stable working class neighborhoods that will cash flow well even when using a property manager.

I would also recommend you use a property manager. Unless you are looking to make being a landlord your primary or secondary job there is no compelling reason to not use a property manager if it will carry itself. Others disagree, but they have chosen landlording as an occupation. It is not required if you are investing. Yes, you will have reduced cash flow on each unit.

The best way to stay "safe" is to avoid the unsafe situations. You do that by your choice of area and property and then by using a great property manager.

Yes, hence that "allowed by law" part of my post. If your area is rent controlled then contact the agency that manages that.

This is just so pathetisad.

I have seen this same thing play out on forum after forum. Someone asks about Alexis McGee or one of her classes or products, there are some positive and some negative comments made. Then sooner or later Alexis swoops in demanding everyone "reveal" themselves to her so she can verify she actually did business with them. Then there is the round or two between her and others that essentially reduces down to the old "I'm rubber and you're glue" playground bit.

Ms. McGee, I know nothing about your classes, courses or sites other than these types of exchanges I've read in several places. I believe you think you are defending your brand but it does not promote a flattering picture to the outside observer.

I think everyone who has any kind of web presence could learn a really good lesson from the US Air Force in response to these types of things. They have a flow chart they use to decide when and how to respond to something online about the US Air Force. Interestingly, most of the paths lead to "just monitor".

Why? Because the people running the online presence programs for the Air Force know creating a scene about something gives it far more attention than it would've otherwise received.

As with all things in life, your mileage will most definitely vary.

I've asked her to get me the counts and update the summary.

One of the notes I made on the first draft of the full report is to explore whether we are really measuring what we think we are.

The sources she used are all Field Guide members or former members, as such, I questioned whether we were just validating that Field Guide members tended to buy based on the 50% rule of thumb.

I don't think we could cost effectively do the kind of study it would take to definitively answer that question. But, in the bigger sense for me it may not matter. Simply showing that the 50% rule of thumb is one way to reduce the risk of a negative cash flow investment is sufficient.

Mike, I will get them to add the count but I know from the 80 sources used it was over 30,000 units total.

Also, let's be very precise in stating what this data says...

The 50% rule of thumb is valid as a gating factor to help prevent a negative cash flow situation. It does say expenses are 50% of income. There is a huge difference in those two things.

For those who might still care about this topic...

Here is the summary of the report:

Operating Expense Study Using 2007 Data - Summary

First, if it is month-to-month it is not a lease.

Since it is not a lease, he can raise the rents with whatever notice is allowed by law and the month-to-month rental agreement you signed.

Another RTC is exactly how this should have been handled, sadly I see it going in a completely different direction.

We have elected politicians who are determined to not let the markets do what markets must do to remain viable - correct themselves.

As such, these left leaning politicians are determined to find ways to keep people who should never have bought a house in those houses. All at taxpayer expense.

The net effect is this will take far longer to work itself out due to the help of the government.

As Ronald Reagan said, the scariest words you will ever hear are, "I am from the government and I am here to help."

Yep, those knuckle-dragging contingency lawyers are just too stupid to check public records and request a court order the disclosure of ownership.