All Forum Posts by: Tyler D.

As in $2million or higher. I know, I'm an idiot. But before you pull out your pitchforks and tell me about cheap cash flowing houses in the Midwest, let me explain.

I have a VA loan that I want to put to work. Recently, the limit was removed, meaning that you can buy any property for any price, so long as you can make the payments.

As for the payments, you can use 75% of the rents in a multifamily property to offset the payment costs, meaning that if 75% of 3 units in a 4plex cover enough of the payment, you're golden.

Given that and the ridiculously low VA loan mortgage rates (30yr @ 2.25%) it makes sense to put the maximum amount of money to work in a single transaction, and I'm trying to decide which location and type of property is best for this.

You have the really expensive areas: NYC, SF, LA, etc. But many of these look unattractive for a variety of reasons.

Hawaii looks fairly attractive. The lowest property taxes combined with a location that isn't going to lose its appeal anytime soon 

Seattle, Austin, and stew other cities are also attractive, mostly due to booming prices due to tech that probably won't slow anytime soon.

As for the property itself, I'm leaning heavily toward a townhome/ rowhome-style fourplex. There attractive, and will likely be just as attractive decades down the road. 

SFHs seem like a listing proposition as the returns would likely be far lower than a nice fourplex of the same price.

So what are you thoughts? What are the best places/ types of properties for my strategy?

I'm looking for the holy grail of financing, and I'm wondering if this would work.

If I were to purchase/ construct 4 homes on a single/ continuous lot, would I be able to finance them with a single conventional or VA loan?

I know this is possible with connected fourplexes, but I'd prefer 4 detached properties if possible.

I want to buy a waterfront condo in Chicago. The idea seems very sexy, and maybe profitable, but I'm not sure if it makes the most sense financially  As I see it, the pros and cons are:

Cons: 

Likely won't cash flow in the beginning. 

Doesn't come with land like an SFH.

Id be subject to an HOA that can change policy/ raise fees at any time.

Pros:

Waterfront space is a scarce resource which could lead to better long term appreciation. (I don't need immediate cash flow and care more about total long term returns).

Relatively affordable compared to other large cities (though the same is true for  SFHs). 

Likely easy to manage and low vacancy due to being an A class area.

It's a cool place that I would like to stay/ visit. Being a scarce resource, opportunities like this may not exist in the future, or may get priced out.

Due to the recent fleeing from cities, not might be the right time to buy a condo, instead of houses which have shot up in price.

Your thoughts?

5 months late, but just wanted to share my thoughts.

The west coast is indeed headed down a scary path. Despite the great statistics of people moving here, job growth, etc, I'd be hesitant to invest a large amount there. Not because I think that the government is going to seize my property, but that the problems with homelessness, lawlessness etc will get worse. That does seem to the the direction that things are heading.

That being said, there are plenty of great places to buy in the USA. If you're worried about liberal/ socialist policies taking over, definitely don't look at Europe, as they're way ahead of the US on that path. You might find some other country that has some investment potential, but the USA is pretty tough to beat when it comes to protecting private property, despite what you might think.

Take a look at Texas. Even with the influx of refugees from California, there's no way in hell they'll become anywhere close to what the West coast is anytime soon.

I've been trying to decide where to buy property, and am coincidentally moving to the Chicagoland area soon.

I know that Chicago in particular has some problems. High debt, corruption, and is losing population. Also the crime

However, it appears to have a quite a few positives. It is DRASTICALLY cheaper than others cities its size. I found plenty of sub 300k apartments/ houses in Chicago, which is simply impossible in LA/NYC/SF. The cashflow is decent as a midwest city, and there are some really nice suburbs as well.

I'm mostly concerned with the future of Chicago, and if it will continue losing population, or if things are expected to reverse/ level out over time. What are your thoughts?

Newbie question here. 

I'd like to buy a distressed property, which is cash-only. The plan is to fix it up, then finance it later.

Of course, I want to make sure I cover my bases before jumping into this, so my questions are:

1) Is it possible to later finance a property that was sold as cash-only?

2) Will I end up needing a higher down payment, or a higher interest rate vs buying with a mortgage right off the bat?

3) Are there any red flags I should be looking out for with a cash-only fixer?

Thanks in advance for the help!

I currently live in the SF Bay area, and am renting as I cannot afford a $1.5m+ house. As both rents and mortgages are astronomically expensive, I'm looking at alternatives.

One is buying land. In the peninsula, there are many plots of land available for several $100k, or even less. In particular, there is a lot of land around boulder creek/ Scotts valley for very cheap. It might be a bit more of a rural lifestyle, and add an extra 10mins to my commute, but that's more than worth the savings, to me.

Assuming that I do my DD and the lot is indeed buildable, I'm wondering what's the catch?

I currently live in the SF Bay area, and am renting as I cannot afford a $1.5m+ house. As both rents and mortgages are astronomically expensive, I'm looking at alternatives.

One is buying land. In the peninsula, there are many plots of land available for several $100k, or even less. In particular, there is a lot of land around boulder creek/ Scotts valley for very cheap. It might be a bit more of a rural lifestyle, and add an extra 10mins to my commute, but that's more than worth the savings, to me.

Assuming that I do my DD and the lot is indeed buildable, I'm wondering what's the catch?

 That's a good point. Cali and Oregon have been having continually-worsening wildfires which will likely lower their value if it continues to get hotter. 

I have heard that with the move away from gas to electricity and increasing use of solar panels, very hot places will be desirable for that reason. However, I don't think you'd actually need to live there, rather have companies put up huge solar farms in hot areas. I think that generally, you'd want to stay away from hot areas that are getting hotter.

What's interesting is that previously hot places are getting colder as well. You can see videos online of people in Spain seeing snow for the first time.

Sounds like a bit of hyperbole ;)