data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/76abb/76abb283bbedf3428b32077421f790ed3b52bb68" alt=""
13 March 2008 | 36 replies
I still though he put it simplistically which is a great way to drive stuff into your head.The stories, the motivation and conviction he speaks with is great to see.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4fb5a/4fb5aa30837e6a633477cc9689e0d7a7040b0ade" alt=""
1 June 2007 | 7 replies
It has some great outlines and makes formulas very simplistic.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a8639/a863910dc9e8a6e8f30b68087da6bdba11d3c56c" alt=""
23 December 2013 | 4 replies
. :)It struck me that owning and thus controlling three of three physically conjoined properties—not merely "close together" properties, but wall-sharing—might present some benefits (similar to owning all of one color in Monopoly, though I'm sure that's too simplistic of an example).
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/11c5c/11c5cbfd14a3572bfef3c0fce911eea786bf6b8d" alt=""
9 January 2014 | 13 replies
Leverage.The who what when where why and how can be argued and go round and round all day but the fact is hands down the best investment for 50K is a leveraged investment, find your maximum leverage.I know it sounds simplistic, almost too simplistic, but too many get lost in all the banter of how and forget the fundamentals and end the day in a deal that "was supposed to" have xyz returns, but was never a leveraged deal.If that were all I had and would ever have........
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1230e/1230ec85d57b104025fd8e4d74e8e91514600cb1" alt=""
13 March 2014 | 42 replies
Originally posted by Gary West:I know a lot of people share your view point, but I just dont understand how a portion of money is better than ALL of the money.That's a very simplistic way to look at it.Just because you're earning 100% of the NOI on a few properties doesn't mean you're getting ALL the money.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/52a91/52a91eba66b6f51c8147aa6733adbe1144daba28" alt=""
6 June 2013 | 7 replies
In my simplistic view, the seller is giving the buyer a piece of real estate in exchange for some amount of money.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6bc37/6bc376c6f8262f58b18b042f0caf1d9b22431814" alt=""
29 June 2013 | 64 replies
I'm not necessarily advocating any debt.All I'm saying is that the original post in this thread is overly simplistic, as are many of the comments above.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/67a82/67a828da8526b12dcad9c8020ccfd4e5bd8fe77e" alt=""
31 July 2013 | 18 replies
That's a tremendously simplistic view of economics, and from an accounting standpoint, won't get you very far...
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a60c3/a60c3b58304c6aea0f137edad8065acdb426e835" alt=""
13 June 2012 | 26 replies
Well, most definitely he would consider making the house very high-tech yet simplistic in appearance which brings out the style in itself much like the other Apple Products.
17 October 2012 | 5 replies
My simplistic analysis would be:$550 x 2 units = gross rents of $1100less 50% for vacancy, capital and expenses gives NOI of $550I get $302 for a payment on $50,400 at 6% for 30 years.That gives cash flow of $248 a month or $2974 a yearCash on cash return of 24%.Your estimate is lower.