Boycott Of The Housing Market

FillSpectre

Chump

No need to quote yourself as I pretty sure that is against rules and is simply rude. I am sure people picked your arguement apart already.

Simple answer is are supply and demand. The mass production of houses in recent times is mostly for smaller homes that were lacking in the Irish property market . Average wage is less important than the median . Comparative poverty is important to understand as is the removal of the state in providing housing

You have extremely simple arguments mostly based on direct comparisons of monetary value which is kind of pointless in supply and demand in differeent markets.

There is no pint is just asking a load of questions as you have yet to make a valid point yourself. Comparing property from two massively differrnent stocked markets with different demographics and economic outlooks is a little silly and doesn't actually examine the market.

I think I see why we need reporters to tell people how to think:p

miju

FillSpectre wrote:

Please don't post up the vasgue report from the indo using the CSO collectors as proof.

why because that will prove you wrong?

in order to mark a property as vacant they had to enquire confirm with neighbours / post men / service companys if the property was vacant failing the fact that there were no visible signs of life (ie: no curtains , furnishings inside) and the properties which they couldn't access due to electronic gates etc where not counted in that figure

there were 300,000 properties all together where forms weren't collected , of that 30,000 were marked as people not home

whats so vague about that?

ps: just for the fun of it

Irish Times Article on 100,000 Vacant Properties (before announcement of 204,000 vacanct properties by the CSO)
Article About How There's now an estimated 270,000 vacant properties in Ireland

by the by , still compiling my links for you so you can have an afternoon of reading where my figures come from

Beta2

Accouring to previous posts:

41% of properties bought in the last year are bought by "investors"
36% are bought by FTBers
The remaining includes trading up, people buying a property after not owning for a while.

If, as it is widely accepted, The days of Property Price appreciation are over what will happen to the stastics?

Why would investors buy into an asset that offers high risk low return, they could make more in a risk free deposit account? That could be up to 41% of demand taken out of the market.

FTBers are panic buying because they feel if they don't buy now, they'll never be able to buy, out of this 36%, a sizeable proportion will adopt a wait and see policy, and further reduce demand.

I know friends with more than one investment apartment in Dublin, the mortgage is 1/3 of their value, most are now for sale, because they see clouds on the horizon and wants to lock in profit. They are not alone, Every street in the country has more for sale signs that they had this time last year. The action of these people will cause an increase in supply.

To summarise I forsee demand falling steeply and supply rising.

I myself have quite a healthy bank balance, and I'll wait until the market bottoms out and i'll buy a house that is 40% bigger and 40% better.

Afuera

FillSpectre wrote:

If in 20 years you can own a house without paying a full mortgage it isn't bad as the rent is all income. That is not speculation but investment.

You are speculating that you will be able to rent the house out to somebody (and that they will be subsidising your mortgage).

IMHO I think the rental market in Ireland will be very weak in the coming years.

They say that we have around an 80% ownership level in Ireland, meaning that there are around 840,000 people either renting or living with relatives at the moment. Since people generally buy houses with another person, those 840,000 people would need to buy around 420,000 houses for us to reach 100% ownership (i.e. for every man, woman and child in the country).

100% ownership is impossible to achieve since you always have a certain elment renting but let's take it as benchmark for arguments sake.

At the current rate of housebuilding (80,000 pa) this could be reached in about 5 years time. If you wanted to you could take into account the reported 200,000 houses lying empty which could be sold and that would mean that 100% ownership could be reached in less than 3 years!

FillSpectre

miju wrote:

why because that will prove you wrong?

No because I had this debate before and at best it is annicodtal. When people worked out the figure it came to 20% of the market was empty. AS I pointed out if there was 20% vacancy in Ireland we would notice. From other studies the average vacancy rate in Ireland is 10% approx.

Now as I live in Dublin an my immediate area has less than 1% vacancies (pretty easy to spot empty houses) that would mean somewhere else would need to take our areas 20%. Yet when going around Dublin I don't see masses of areas empty so the rest of the country must have 100% vacancy etc...

If you are going to pop in when you think you have a slam dunk note the whole response not just the bit you think you can prove. AS I said express it as a percentage and compare with other years. TH efigure means nothing without comparison.

chump

FillSpectre wrote:

Chump

No need to quote yourself as I pretty sure that is against rules and is simply rude. I am sure people picked your arguement apart already.

They didn't yet... Was waiting for you.

FillSpectre wrote:

Simple answer is are supply and demand.

But the point I've made, is that where is the demand? Why is rent so low?
Is the demand not investor driven demand, ie. people hoping the market rises in the the next 5 years as it has in the past 5, and hoping for a quick buck.

FillSpectre wrote:

The mass production of houses in recent times is mostly for smaller homes that were lacking in the Irish property market .

I don't think people would be complaining if the houses they built were larger. They've built small, relatively high density housing, to make more money, simple as.

FillSpectre wrote:

Average wage is less important than the median .

Why?

FillSpectre wrote:

Comparative poverty is important to understand as is the removal of the state in providing housing

Comparitive property is important to understand? What do you mean by this?

FillSpectre wrote:

You have extremely simple arguments

My post was with reference to an argument put forward that irish house prices aren't higher than other cities. So if a simple comparison shows this, so be it.

FillSpectre wrote:

mostly based on direct comparisons of monetary value which is kind of pointless in supply and demand in differeent markets.

You keep mentioning demand, why are rents so low?

FillSpectre wrote:

There is no pint is just asking a load of questions as you have yet to make a valid point yourself.

I've made numerous points on this thread, maybe read through them.

FillSpectre wrote:

Comparing property from two massively differrnent stocked markets with different demographics and economic outlooks is a little silly and doesn't actually examine the market.

Demongraphics again. Empty houses. Low rents. Average wages.

FillSpectre wrote:

I think I see why we need reporters to tell people how to think:p

FillSpectre don't be so ignorant as to assume you're dealing with merely chumps on this board.

I think the fundamental affordability issue is the important one.
The huge influence of investors on the 'demand' side explains quite plainly why rents are so low, yet prices are so high. Provided we're not oversupplied (which who knows, we may well be) rentals and prices will eventually come to an equilibrium. Investors sell off at a price point that renters find attractive, and the pendulum will eventually swing.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Afuera

chump wrote:

FillSpectre don't be so ignorant as to assume you're dealing with merely chumps on this board.

Well said chump!

miju

GreeBo wrote:

I think its a bit simplistic to think that investors will bail out at the first sign of a plateau...

i agree , in fact what i said in earlier posts is that they'll hold off selling but when it becomes obvious prices have platteaud then it'll be a different kettle of fish

GreeBo wrote:

so conversely as prices come down thats more FTB's who will come back?

yes , the question is how far FTB's will allow them to fall before buying back in

GreeBo wrote:

but thats not a bubble bursting, if the demand comes back as soon as the prices stabilise...

of course it it , to give a recent example , tech stocks were bought again after prices stabelised and we all know that was an almighty crash / bubble

but yeah what you suggest is not beyond impossible i'm just of the opinion that people will hold of to see how low they go

Gurgle

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

According to PermantTsb's online mortgage calculator, You can borrow 322k towards a 350k home (92%), at repayments over 30 years of 1555.89.

It doesn't specify if that already takes into account interest relief.

You have to admit rent will go up over those 30 years while interest rates will vary over the years but will on average be 3% to 6%.

So in terms of having as much money in your pocket as possible right now - sure rent away. But don't pretend you're making the long-term smart choice.

FillSpectre

Afuera wrote:

You are speculating that you will be able to rent the house out to somebody (and that they will be subsidising your mortgage).

No the same way somebody who sets up a shop is not speculating thet will have customers. It is a business plan. Invest in a something using the banks money and invest your own in also to get return in the future. There is a limited number of places close to major areas of employment that is where an investor tends to buy. To insure good rental return You don't set up a shop in the middle of nowhere and the same priniciple applies

Afuera wrote:

They say that we have around an 80% ownership level in Ireland, meaning that there are around 840,000 people either renting or living with relatives at the moment. Since people generally buy houses with another person, those 840,000 people would need to buy around 420,000 houses for us to reach 100% ownership (i.e. for every man, woman and child in the country).

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/peo_hom_own-people-home-ownership
but that is 6 years ago. There are more adults and less people appear to own now IMHO. I would say this is the figure that will give to become in lin with other EU members. The next to us is a country with a decreasing population!
100% ownership is impossible to achieve since you always have a certain elment renting but let's take it as benchmark for arguments sake.

I think you are missunderstanding how some figures are worked out. I would guess 2 adult children living in their parents house would be considered as homeowners. Statistical terms and economic terms should no be confused used with everyday conversational terms and expressions. I'm not 100% sure but I doubt it is as simple as adults who own their own home

miju

FillSpectre wrote:

No because I had this debate before and at best it is annicodtal. When people worked out the figure it came to 20% of the market was empty. AS I pointed out if there was 20% vacancy in Ireland we would notice. From other studies the average vacancy rate in Ireland is 10% approx.

Now as I live in Dublin an my immediate area has less than 1% vacancies (pretty easy to spot empty houses) that would mean somewhere else would need to take our areas 20%. Yet when going around Dublin I don't see masses of areas empty so the rest of the country must have 100% vacancy etc...

If you are going to pop in when you think you have a slam dunk note the whole response not just the bit you think you can prove. AS I said express it as a percentage and compare with other years. TH efigure means nothing without comparison.

oh right the CSO notice it but you dont so that makes the CSO wrong?

can you please explain what the hell is so annecdotal about esb / post men / letting agents / apartment management companies saying a property is vacant , that my friend is nothing near anecdotal

of course i wish i did quote your whole post seeing as how you've deleted / edited it

FillSpectre

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

The CSO know plenty the people collecting information from the CSO don't analys data. You failed to make it as a percentage and compare I have done this in what I guess is archived in property so go have a look at that deebate where is is ripped to shreds as accurate information.

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Are they now cheap? That is what I asked not cheaper than before. I know many people getting more rent than 2000.

FillSpectre

miju wrote:

oh right the CSO notice it but you dont so that makes the CSO wrong?
can you please explain what the hell is so annecdotal about esb / post men / letting agents / apartment management companies saying a property is vacant , that my friend is nothing near anecdotal

of course i wish i did quote your whole post seeing as how you've deleted / edited it

I had this deabte and firstly the CSO reported knothing and will be spending their time gathered data to give accurate information. You want to date this issue go and drag up the thread in the archives.

Please tell me what I have deleted or edit in this post?

Where is this 20% national vacancy?

FillSpectre

chump wrote:

They didn't yet... Was waiting for you.

Well obviously not enough to concentrating on what I said and can't tell the word "poverty" from "property"

I am not into such a petty point pick argument as you may be .

I'll keep it simple for you. Supply and demand go learn how it works.

Rent is cheap becasue rental property is in good supply so less demand. Property prices are high becasue desired property is in short supply so high demand. You seem to have trouble understanding this

You cvan think what you like about me and my views but as you don't understand the basics and have yet to make a valid point I'll stick with my view of you untill that changes.

I could care less about your views but I am not going to entertain somebody who has no point and is actively waiting to get petty with me.

Price is not the only possible high figure that will give in the irish property market reckon less people will own homes is what will happen. You seem to be working on the assumption everybody will get a home at some point. Using the UK as a comparison home ownship rate will drop over 10%. But why compare that figure it does suit your view

miju

FillSpectre wrote:

The CSO know plenty the people collecting information from the CSO don't analys data. You failed to make it as a percentage and compare I have done this in what I guess is archived in property so go have a look at that deebate where is is ripped to shreds as accurate information.

the enumerators didnt analyse the data they collected and submitted it to the CSO and they analysed the data that's where the figures come from :rolleyes:

had a search about couldnt find your analysis , linkie please?

FillSpectre wrote:

I had this deabte and firstly the CSO reported knothing and will be spending their time gathered data to give accurate information.

they reported this as a preliminary figure if memory servers and if i remember the thread your talking about i think it was generally agreed that it may be off by about 30-50,000 up or down but no more leaving a still highly significant number of unoccupied houses

Raskolnikov

An exercise for you guys.

Go on to daft.ie and do a search on the number of houses to rent in Dublin/Cork/Galway, then do a search for the number of houses to rent in the same county.

Now for the interesting part, do a search on apartments to rent in the same county and then again to buy.

Before I tell you my conclusions, what do you guys reckon?

JimmySmith

Gurgle wrote:

According to PermantTsb's online mortgage calculator, You can borrow 322k towards a 350k home (92%), at repayments over 30 years of 1555.89.

It doesn't specify if that already takes into account interest relief.

You have to admit rent will go up over those 30 years while interest rates will vary over the years but will on average be 3% to 6%.

So in terms of having as much money in your pocket as possible right now - sure rent away. But don't pretend you're making the long-term smart choice.

Take that for an investor. Assuming they have taken out the 92% mortgage on a 2 bed house.

€322K

Monthly payments on mortgage.
€1500 per month = €18000 Made up of 12,600 in interest and 5,400 principal.

he gets €1100 * 10 a year in rent = €11,000. Possibly more but we'll take €1100 for an example

None of that 11,000 is taxed.

The investor is buying himself a 2 bed house for €7000 a year or €583 a month.

in 30 years thats his house whether it went up in value or not.

Now thats not expensive at all.

Now who is going to run from that.

Most investors pay at least 60% of the purchase price up front too.

FillSpectre

miju wrote:

the enumerators didnt analyse the data they collected and submitted it to the CSO and they analysed the data that's where the figures come from :rolleyes:

Can you actually prove that? The article you posted does not say the CSO annouced these figures. I know why, it is becasue they didn't issue the figures.

miju wrote:

had a search about couldnt find your analysis , linkie please?

Don't know how to do it here. Both your stories were discussed before in property and pulled appart I can find them if I knew how to get to archives. Effectively the figure doesn't matter unless it is done as a comparative level. If ireland has always had 10% vacncy if that reemians relatively constant it mean nothing

miju wrote:

they reported this as a preliminary figure if memory servers and if i remember the thread your talking about i think it was generally agreed that it may be off by about 30-50,000 up or down but no more leaving a still highly significant number of unoccupied houses

Where are all the vacant properties? Simple logic says if there is a 20% vacany in the country it would be very noticable in the most heavily urbanised areas in the country. Do you disagree with this principle?

Afuera

FillSpectre wrote:

No the same way somebody who sets up a shop is not speculating thet will have customers. It is a business plan. Invest in a something using the banks money and invest your own in also to get return in the future. There is a limited number of places close to major areas of employment that is where an investor tends to buy. To insure good rental return You don't set up a shop in the middle of nowhere and the same priniciple applies

We don't even have an accurate picture of how much property is being rented or available to rent in the country FFS. How can you do anything but speculate if you are making an investment in the Irish property market with the lack of quantifiable data? To try and spin it as a savvy investment strategy is a joke!

FillSpectre wrote:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/peo_hom_own-people-home-ownership
but that is 6 years ago. There are more adults and less people appear to own now IMHO. I would say this is the figure that will give to become in lin with other EU members.

Give me one reason why it's going to fall in line? Tenants rights in Ireland are abysmal compared to the rest of Europe. We will never have much long term renters until that is tackled.

FillSpectre wrote:

I think you are missunderstanding how some figures are worked out. I would guess 2 adult children living in their parents house would be considered as homeowners. Statistical terms and economic terms should no be confused used with everyday conversational terms and expressions. I'm not 100% sure but I doubt it is as simple as adults who own their own home

Unless you can prove otherwise, I'm going to stick with my way of calculating it thanks!

Gurgle

JimmySmith wrote:

he gets €1100 * 10 a year in rent = €11,000. Possibly more but we'll take €1100 for an example

None of that 11,000 is taxed.

I'm pretty sure that 11k is subject to income tax.
Have a look at page 3 of this thread, I worked out a rough example of the numbers for an investor and a buy-to-let property.

Carb

JimmySmith wrote:

Take that for an investor. Assuming they have taken out the 92% mortgage on a 2 bed house.

€322K

Monthly payments on mortgage.
€1500 per month = €18000 Made up of 12,600 in interest and 5,400 principal.

he gets €1100 * 10 a year in rent = €11,000. Possibly more but we'll take €1100 for an example

None of that 11,000 is taxed.

The investor is buying himself a 2 bed house for €7000 a year or €583 a month.

in 30 years thats his house whether it went up in value or not.

Now thats not expensive at all.

Now who is going to run from that.

Most investors pay at least 60% of the purchase price up front too.

I would seriously suggest you get financial advice before investing in property. Those are probably the most ridiculous calculations I've ever seen.

chump

FillSpectre wrote:

Well obviously not enough to concentrating on what I said and can't tell the word "poverty" from "property"

I don't even know what you're talking about here.

FillSpectre wrote:

I am not into such a petty point pick argument as you may be .

I think you've misunderstood something, because I never got petty with you.

FillSpectre wrote:

I'll keep it simple for you. Supply and demand go learn how it works.

Once again here you're being condescending, and just rude. If you want to demean somebody, look in the mirror.

FillSpectre wrote:

Rent is cheap becasue rental property is in good supply so less demand. Property prices are high becasue desired property is in short supply so high demand. You seem to have trouble understanding this

I certainly don't. There is not a demand problem with property as a whole. There is a demand issue with regards to owning, due to heavy investment, previously bullish sentiment, FTB urgency (fueled by the media). Yet things are changing. Investors, particularly IO investors (and EA's will agree to there be plenty of those) will question the sensibility of entering a flat market, and so new investors will decline dramatically. On top of this IO investors already in the market will consider fleeing.
(I personally believe a large amount of investors are in it for appreciation gains and not for the long haul -personal opinion)
FTB urgency will decline due to more bearish sentiment, and no real need to 'jump on' to the property ladder. I personally believe many people bought something affordable sooner than they would have if they hadn't fallen over each other to get onto the 'ladder'. How many people bought due to the fear of being 'priced out'?

FillSpectre wrote:

You cvan think what you like about me and my views but as you don't understand the basics and have yet to make a valid point I'll stick with my view of you untill that changes.

What about

Investor Issues
- low rental yields
- rising interest rates
- bearish market sentiment, limited scope for capital appreciation
- census figures suggesting poor rental in certain areas
+ immigration (- other EU states soon open borders to accession states)

FTB Issues, mainly affordability
- interest rates, limiting affordability and loan sizes
- gross salary multiples already twice as high in many cases as 10 years ago
- 100% and 40year mortgages already have allowd prices reach where they are, where to next?
- salaries rising slowly, average 30-35k
- rising rental/living costs may outprice low-paid immigrants
- declining birth rates from 1980 onwards

FillSpectre wrote:

I could care less about your views but I am not going to entertain somebody who has no point and is actively waiting to get petty with me.

I'm not trying to get pretty with you - you're the one who continues to dismiss the person who responds to you by being short with them and insinuiting you're more 'clued-up' than they are.

FillSpectre wrote:

Price is not the only possible high figure that will give in the irish property market reckon less people will own homes is what will happen.

I haven't a clue what you're saying here.

FillSpectre wrote:

You seem to be working on the assumption everybody will get a home at some point.

I'm not assuming this at all. My comparison to London was in response to someone who said Ireland wasn't that expensive.

Gurgle wrote:

No, south dublin is more expensive than idaho.
It is not more expensive than Paris/New York/ London.
The Irish countryside is similar to the French countryside, the German countryside, The English countryside.

FillSpectre wrote:

Using the UK as a comparison home ownship rate will drop over 10%. But why compare that figure it does suit your view

I haven't mentioned home ownership rates anywhere.

FillSpectre

Afuera wrote:

We don't even have an accurate picture of how much property is being rented or available to rent in the country FFS. How can you do anything but speculate if you are making an investment in the Irish property market with the lack of quantifiable data? To try and spin it as a savvy investment strategy is a joke!

I agree there is no accurate data for the entire Iisland. YOu can easily makea clculated guess on the right property to buy that has good chance of continuel rent. Such as near a hospital/college, good transport links etc...
I am not spining anything I pointing out what you said is untrue it is not speculation it is a business plan. If you insist it is speculation then every business is speculation.

Afuera wrote:

Give me one reason why it's going to fall in line? Tenants rights in Ireland are abysmal compared to the rest of Europe. We will never have much long term renters until that is tackled.

House prices are too expensive for people on athe average wage to buy but price continue to rise. Tenants rights in Irelandd are quite good now so it has been addressed. What further rights do you think they need? Unlike saying prices must crash I am giving a reason why ownship will drop. People suggest a crash based purely on price rise still nobody is staating when this happened before in history

Afuera wrote:

Unless you can prove otherwise, I'm going to stick with my way of calculating it thanks!

Fair enough but try to compare the figures you are thinking about and the reality you know. Do 80% of the adults you know own the place they live?
AS you are sticking with your figures let me point out some flaws. No rate of increase in adult numbers is accounted for, demographics say there is an increase in single living as does the divorce rate, imigration needs to be considered and affordability remains an issue. More property needed yes but who owns it is the debate. Investors or businesses could own the property and the people could be renting. People here insist that investor dominate the market so this is more likely with a drop in homeownership. The gap between the rich and poor tends to increase in propserous times as a general rule.

FillSpectre

Chump

Quoting so much is very petty IMHO. I choose not to respond to you for that reason and your inability to comprehend simple terms. Either you are unable to understand or playing the fool either way you won't waste my time

chump

FillSpectre wrote:

Chump

Quoting so much is very petty IMHO. I choose not to respond to you for that reason and your inability to comprehend simple terms. Either you are unable to understand or playing the fool either way you won't waste my time

That's fair enough. Your inability to read correctly, write coherently or digest information tickle me.

Afuera

FillSpectre wrote:

I am not spining anything I pointing out what you said is untrue it is not speculation it is a business plan. If you insist it is speculation then every business is speculation.

It's a flawed business plan, which ultimately amounts to speculation, if you can't verify the basic underlying facts to insure it's economic viability.

FillSpectre wrote:

Tenants rights in Irelandd are quite good now so it has been addressed. What further rights do you think they need?

Tenants only have security of tenure for four years in Ireland. Rents can be raised at the whim of the landlord.

FillSpectre wrote:

Unlike saying prices must crash I am giving a reason why ownship will drop. People suggest a crash based purely on price rise still nobody is staating when this happened before in history

I haven't heard anyone saying that they are going to crash just because prices have been rising.

It's the rate of the rise compared to incomes and the fact that economically we seem to be entering a different era, with increasing rate rises, that has most people worried.

FillSpectre wrote:

AS you are sticking with your figures let me point out some flaws. No rate of increase in adult numbers is accounted for, demographics say there is an increase in single living as does the divorce rate, imigration needs to be considered and affordability remains an issue. More property needed yes but who owns it is the debate. Investors or businesses could own the property and the people could be renting.

Demographics, immigration, emigration etc. are all very hard to foresee is this increasingly global environment. I'm not too sure how safe it is to assume that we need more property either.

The main thing I was trying to show with those figures is that:
1) It's not that difficult for supply to match demand at the current output levels (that is if they haven't already being reached but is currently being distorted by speculators in the market)
2) The demand of rental properties has an upper limit. Once that is reached some investors will have unlet properties and have to pay the entire mortgage of their investment on their own.

FillSpectre wrote:

People here insist that investor dominate the market so this is more likely with a drop in homeownership.

IMHO it's not that likely that investors will keep piling in unless they are able to get a quantifiable return.

SkepticOne

JimmySmith wrote:

Take that for an investor. Assuming they have taken out the 92% mortgage on a 2 bed house.

€322K

Monthly payments on mortgage.
€1500 per month = €18000 Made up of 12,600 in interest and 5,400 principal.

he gets €1100 * 10 a year in rent = €11,000. Possibly more but we'll take €1100 for an example

None of that 11,000 is taxed.

The investor is buying himself a 2 bed house for €7000 a year or €583 a month.

in 30 years thats his house whether it went up in value or not.

Now thats not expensive at all.

Now who is going to run from that.

Most investors pay at least 60% of the purchase price up front too.

2.184% net rate of return. This is not taking into account your selling costs, maintenance costs etc, stamp duty etc.

lomb

Afuera wrote:

We will never have much long term renters until that is tackled.

I doubt ireland will ever have alot of long term renters. the stock market is dead imho long term, so pensions are useless except for the huge tax advantages. even warren buffett says its very hard these days to make money. most of the worlds large caps/ stable shares like coca-cola, GE, Mcdonalds, etc are suffering from essential deflation in goods due to consumerism/increased competetion/ china/ inflation in wages and are incapable of doing anything more than returning 5% per annum and thats if u are lucky.
i mean look at the royal bank of scotland, they have sown up the uk market, but their share price is flat over 5 years. the only thing they do is return 4.5% as a dividend. however they use every trick in the book to sustain this, how long can they keep this up??
that just leaves property,its the one and only 'decent' investment that most people make. everyone needs a roof, and its a great way to save money, pay the capital and interest over 25-35 years and at the end own an asset that will probably have trebled in value. not bad in any ones book regardless of the short term carnage that may happen.

lomb

Afuera wrote:

Rents can be raised at the whim of the landlord.

true, but tenants can leave virtually at their own whim also. most residential leases are under 1 year, i dont think most tenants want onerous commerical style leases for 20 years where there is a 3 year rent review. maybe im wrong but i dont think so.