Why getting into real estate primarily for cash flow is wrong - and even dangerous

Why getting into real estate primarily for cash flow is wrong - and even dangerous

Investor · Milwaukee - Mequon, WI · Member since 2010 · 5k+ posts · 7k+ votes

Hear me out.

Over the last years, more and more of the BP discussions circle around cash flow. As LTR was getting harder 2018-2020 STR became the new thing everyone started chasing. Until that started getting difficult. So now what?

The idea aspiring investors get mesmerized with is basically to start in real estate and somehow build a portfolio out of thin air. And gurus are happy to feed that dream. Basically, they suggest to buy a property with very little money, collect the cashflow, then refinance to pull money out of the property, buy more real estate for more cash flow and quit the W2 they hate.

The first flaw is that a lot of the books written before 2020 will tell you to analyze more deals until you find one that cashflows. The problem is that the market landscape has fundamentally shifted. Back then looking at more deals would eventually get you a "quality" deal, today it will get you a deal in the hood. And as you can read here on BP this is probably the number one recipe for financial failure. Best case, you learn a lot, survive financially and trade up. You certainly won't achieve any significant wealth in that asset class. The second flaw is the idea that you can refinance your way to wealth - that has always been very risky even with low interest rates.

It is called in-vesting for a reason. You are putting money in. Let me explain.

The goal of real estate investing is to allocate your capital in a low-risk investment that grows your net worth predictably over long periods of time - think at least decades if not longer! The superpower of real estate investing is equity growth: the asset appreciates, while inflation and loan payments erode the underlying debt until you own the asset free and clear and can leverage it again. When you run numbers in a BP calculator you can see quickly that equity gains DWARF cash flow. So, for anyone who wants to go into real estate primarily for cash flow, they have not yet understood the concept! 

Don't get me wrong:  cash flow is still an important factor, it keeps the lights on, it pays for repairs and upgrades. And eventually, it helps you buy more real estate (until when you start milking your portfolio to cover your living expenses).

If cash flow is what you want, buy a business. 

A business has an inverted financial profile: it is literally designed for cash flow. That's the main objective. And not just $200 per month per door (which has been the long-standing average, at least here in Milwaukee) Yes, you can also create equity with a business, if you are growing it to a size where it becomes a sellable asset, you replace yourself, hire a manager and a team of workers. But ask anyone who ever sold a business: it is not easy!! That's why many businesses just close instead of being sold.

Real estate investing provides a lot more creative angles than the stock market, but on a conceptual level, nobody would seriously attempt to replace their W2 income in a few years by investing a few thousand dollars in the stock market. In a way, STR is a hybrid because while real estate is part of it, you are really running a one-room hotel.

So if you are an aspiring real estate investor, the first question you should ask is where do I have a consistent source of free cash that I can use to invest? That can be excess income from your W2 job, or it can be a business you run on the side. Then you can take that cash and buy quality real estate, accumulate the cash flow and grow your portfolio-wide before you grow it deep - meaning paying off loans. 

The day you start siphoning cash flow out of your real estate portfolio, you are stifling future growth. So you will have to decide if your portfolio has grown enough to support your goals and dreams at that point. Otherwise, keep pushing!

74Reply
2,686 views

Most Popular Reply

Joe VilleneuvePro Member
Plymouth, MI · Member since 2013 · 13k+ posts · 19k+ votes
1y

The CF mistake REI make is they think you can accumulate CF properties starting from the beginning. You can't, and you shouldn't. Even if you could (and you can) find a lot of PCF deals out there, how do you buy them? It's not like you have an unlimited source of DP's available to you, and buying all cash is foolish. If you think you are accomplishing something just because an all cash deal is PCF, it's an illusion. All you are doing is playing catch up to your cost,...you cost being the cash you put into every deal. That's your cost. The more you put in, the more you have to recover before the PCF is actually a profit. That's one of the big reasons to leverage. You can spread your cash out, and each property then accumulates CF to recover the same cash you might have used on one all cash deal.

Buying for accumulating equity is also an illusion.  The equity is actually what you are paying for the property.  It's a form of cash that is locked up and useless to you.  Those that say it has value, I'll give you all of my sports trophies I've accumulated over the years.  I'll even through in my daughter's.  They are both the same value.

The power of the equity is the PV it buys.  When you initially buy a property, ad 20% DP, you are buying a property that's worth 5 times what you are paying for it.  As the equity grows, it's diluting the power of that equity since it grows on a 1 to 1 ratio to the PV growth.  Remember, that equity started out as a 5 to 1 ratio.

Here's my take on the roles of CF and equity, and why I say you must have both:

Role of CF - To accumulate within a property to equal the cash you put into it. As long as you have PCF, this really means you have a clear property since the tenant is paying for the rest.

Role of Equity - To grow from appreciation to a point where the growth is equal to the original equity, thus doubling it.

When both things occur (order doesn't matter), I sell.

Banking only on either CF or equity is a loss.  You have to have both, and to say you can't just means you are looking in the wrong markets, and/or using the wrong strategies.

See this reply in the discussion

164 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Scott TrenchPro Member
    Rental Property Investor · Denver, CO · Member since 2014 · 2k+ posts · 6k+ votes
    1y

    Leverage does not always win.

    While you can build a ton of wealth, and your financial model will suggest that max leverage generates more wealth, the moment you go all in on real estate with max leverage, it can ruin you. 

    I have some friends and colleagues who are learning this lesson very painfully. 

    Some of them are, or will be, learning this very painful lesson very publicly. 

    No point in arguing it, we'll just watch it unfold this year and next. 

  • Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @Joe S.:
    Quote from @James Hamling:
    Quote from @Ken M.:
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:
    Quote from @Ethan Brackin:
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:
    Quote from @Ethan Brackin:
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:
    Quote from @Ethan Brackin:
    Quote from @Paul Novak:
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:
    Quote from @Paul Novak:

    Marcus I think this was a great post.  I have not subscribed to the stance of trying to get into a property with as little down as possible just to generate cashflow.  I have actually taking the unpopular stance of the exact opposite.  I have tried to focus on properties that are in good locations where I can attract good tenants and then adjusted what I put down to hit my cashflow goals.  Not adjusting for vacancy and maintenance my cashflow goal on a property is $500 per month at a minimum.  We have put down 20 - 40% on some properties to achieve this goal.  Like you said we have been saving upwards of 60% of our W2 income and business cashflow in order to do this.  


    Hi Paul! I think I am just south of you?  Unpopular maybe, but for sure realistic and prudent. Buying quality assets that are in a desirable location and in good condition with a modest amount of leverage is IMO the only approach that I feel comfortable recommending. I have tried pretty much anything personally and I have seen so many investors start and either succeed or fail - well, let's call it abort and sell to never touch RE again.

    And then I get calls from OOS investors who want to buy a 120k duplex in Milwaukee and when I try to tell them what will happen they go: uhm, I don't think we are a good fit. (Which is true, because I do mostly luxury residential, just trying to help)


    Marcus, you are just south. I invest in the Sheboygan area. I agree with your assessments. So much content I see about ways to put as little money down as possible or doing the BRRR method so you can purchase a property and then pull out all the equity so after it's rehabbed you can get all your capital back out. I am not trying to knock those approaches and obviously they have worked great for many people but I feel the market is different then it was in the past. Personally I am not finding deals that could support those strategies in my market today based on my current skills and available time. If I took that approach I would have negative cashflow which isn't a good sustainable business model. I am okay with limited cashflow while I'm in my prime W2 working years but not negative. My business still needs to sustain itself. In my opinion that leaves me with two options. Sit back and wait for the market conditions to flip to where those strategies would work for me, or adapt to the current market. Sitting on the sidelines for me isn't an option. Knowing I'll be holding onto these properties for the next 30 years plus I have no issues with my strategy. I also am not looking for cheep properties in bad locations that could turn a quick buck. I want properties that I am proud to own and if I was personally looking for a rental I would be willing to rent. Obviously that isn't a requirement for most to buy a property but it's something that's important to me. Because I purchase properties like that I feel we attract tenants that we can relate to which helps us on the property management side with communication and working through issues.

    Why do you believe there is a higher likelihood of negative cash flow with BRRRR? Is it because the loan you assume after a cash-out refinance is more likely to be higher than your gross cash flow?

    Hi Ethan, I have been BRRRR-ing in Milwaukee for over a decade and after 2016-2018 or so I had to work increasingly harder to make deals work (much more complex rehabs: mold, foundation issues etc). Today our inventory is so low, that sellers don't have to give me 50% discount because of poor condition. They will find a first time home buyer that will be happy to pay close to what the neighbor's house (in great condition) is worth. If you can find one where you get the price to match the work needed, it is still one of the best strategies! But that's a big IF in 2025.

    The approach that I take now is to let market appreciation and inflation do the heavy lifting for me. We have seen prices go up 8.2% in 2024 here and why would I work hard for half a year to do not that much better, if I can just do nothing instead?

    Money, time and energy are interchangeable in real estate. If you don't have much money, but you do have time and energy, you can use that to find a unicorn deal that will still work with BRRRR.

    Paul?

    Thank you for the thorough response. Do you personally use traditional financing with BRRRR or do you pay for properties with cash? I have read the BRRRR book as well as some other investment books and though I am aware that the author recommends buying properties with all cash, I am still torn between going that route or going with traditional financing instead (or perhaps even a "hybrid" of those two options; saving up to put 40 to even 50% down or more to get higher cash flow and more equity right away, while also being able to forego the waiting process of building up enough capital to invest all-cash in another property again (assuming I don't use a hard-money loan). I'm not sure how this "hybrid" approach would affect the cash-out refinance or if the approach is even viable at all, though. I have never invested before so forgive my ignorance. 

    The most important thing on your first deal is to keep the risk low. You do this buy buying a quality asset in a good enough location. And by not biting off more than you can chew for the rehab. A cosmetic rehab is still quite a challenge for the first time. Paint, carpet, light fixtures, maybe some doors, plus odds and ends - you'll learn a lot! Conventional financing will work for this just fine. Yes you will need a 6 months seasoning period, but by the time you got the work done, a tenant moved in - the 6 months will be almost over. HML is expensive, better to use private money from friends or family. Once you got the first deal under your belt, you can start thinking about the second.

    I did alright on my first 3 rehabs, but got over-confident and #4 was a massive mess and turned out to be a money pit. I took on too much. I remember looking at the $60,000 bank account for the rehab at almost zero, still checks to write and still more work I had not even scheduled yet. I felt physically sick and had to go tell my wife.. The good thing is that rentals are very forgiving and I eventually recovered and years later it even started cashflowing. 


     Your advice is invaluable, thank you! Lastly, do you typically find yourself cash-out refinancing your deals and, if you do, do you set your rent on the higher end to compensate for the increased mortgage costs you will inevitably have to pay after you refinance?




    I am not in favor of growing via cash-out refi. If you just borrow more money, you are getting deeper in debt. As you mentioned, you have to eventually pay it all back, with interest. There is a healthy amount of leverage, but the whole point of investing is to grow equity, and eventually a return on that equity. If you constantly cash-out refi you reduce equity and cash flow.

    That's why I am trying so hard to make the point that you need a business that generates cash so you have money to in-vest on top of what your W2 is making. You don't need to buy a car dealership, it can be a side hustle or an online business.

    If you try to get more rent than fair market, you will rent to desperate tenants, who got rejected everywhere else. We do the opposite. We do everything we can to attract the best tenants possible and have them stay for many years. That's why our rehabs look more like flips and we even finish basements as we target families with kids who want to get into the school district.

    '
    "As you mentioned, you have to eventually pay it all back" - which is true, however you either pay interest (which is tax deductible) and keep the asset, or pay you tax.

    If you never sell, (you will it to your offspring) you never pay tax and they don't pay tax. Which is what we teach our investors how to do. When you sell though, you have the added costs of sales (real estate agents, closing costs etc) and you have the problem of finding the next great deal. 

    Just thoughts for the lurkers.

    That is not correct or accurate. 

    There is tax implications to inheriting property: https://www.irs.gov/faqs/interest-dividends-other-types-of-i...

    There is strategies to mitigate this such as trust but in such your not inheriting the property, there is just adjustments within the trust such as change of managers etc.. 

    Finding a "next great buy" is NOT an issue if doing a strategy for enduring legacy. 

    Example, I have a client who recently transferred the reigns to generation 4, yes 4, of running the family REI Trust.

    They have done 1031's going back generations, to which that tax-can is still getting kicked down field!

    What Great-Grandpa started looooong ago, has now grown into this massive holdings. 

    So what do they do to "find the next great deal"?

    They keep it simple, REAL SIMPLE, they only buy New-Con. 

    They sell an older inventory unit, get all there appreciation and equity liquid, and use it to secure 2 new built units. 

    Growing total holdings, resetting Cap-x clock, roll every dollar into that expanded holdings, and let it run 5-7yrs. 

    On average the entire portfolio keeps doubling every 7yrs. Do you have any clue how massive it's gotten now? Agent fee's etc. for cost of selling is a drop in the bucket compared to the returns. 

    This portfolio has now fully funded over a dozen university tuitions.   

    Because the cash-flow also keeps expanding. 

    Once upon a time they tried just camping out on properties for extended time periods. They found that cap-x kept gobbling up revenues and it was a net-0. BUT net-0 just on the cash-flow differential. What it DID cost them was appreciation, OPPORTUNITY COST, because they were only earning appreciation on that 1 vs the 2 it could have been had they pyramided when available. 

    And pyramiding not only multiplies the appreciation basis, it multiplies the cash-flow potential basis. 

    The math is very clear in this regard, compounding returns always beats static returns. That includes compounding returns basis. 

    Not to mention that as your unit count increases it insulates against impact of vacancy and other unforeseen expenses because each individual unit is mitigated across a larger grouping. This is how insurance works, imagine if an insurance carrier only had 10 people in it, 1 needs a surgery, POW that's a BIG hit. But with a million people 1 needing surgery is pin prick. 

    "But what if 500k need surgery at same time"..... Uh-huh, yeah we call that fantasy land. We have to work in reality sense of numbers not "what-if" ultra extremes of fantasy. 

    If you have 20 units, any 1 vacancy hit's 1/20th of revenues. VS with 2, vacancy in any 1 is 50% hit to revenues. 

    As unit count grows there is an arch of risk exposure that grows, crests, then starts dropping very fast. The trick is getting over that hump to descending risk exposure via unit ct. growth. 


    On the REI Trust where grandpa set up long go… so I'm following that they turn over their old assets and buy new construction and basically double they're holding every seven years.:)

    Does the trustees sign to get new Loans for the new construction properties? How is that set up and is it a pretty smooth transaction? 

    It's a rather extensive "thing" now so probably a bit over the top for most. 

    There is the trust, and the trust has a continuity of control plan. There is a kind of "board" which is assorted family members who meet bi-annually to review, vote, decide on any items they need to. 

    That "board" has a designated person who is the active rep for the "board". Basically a manager. They make sure whatever assorted day-2-days are done. So there is a singular point of contact who's active and not a need to wrangle a whole group for every everything. 

    There is also a second designated person who's a kind of CFO. 

    The trust owns an LLC, let's call it Asset LLC.

    Asset LLC is the ownership of the properties. There is a designated person who is the President/CEO of this LLC. Generally the same person who is the designated rep. for the trust "board".

    There is a second LLC owned by the trust, call it Money LLC. The designated President/CFO is generally the CFO from the trust as well.

    When in process of transferring duties to next persons, the newer persons start in the LLC, eventually take over that role, the exiting person remains on at trust, later bringing in the replacing person to that role as well. It's a process that happens over years.

    There is other actions the trust does than just investment real estate, hence the separation of LLC's.

    Asset LLC will "borrow" funds from Money LLC, as if it were any other private lender. Note is made, interest, whole 9, but kept simplified. I should add; NO, they do NOT do REI in all-cash, ever. They use financing.

    There had been a recent addition of, call it, Landlord LLC. This entity leases property from Asset LLC on NNN basis, via funds "borrowed" from Money LLC, and operates the property for profit as a landlord.

    Thus insulating Asset LLC from public facing liabilities, mitigating risk exposure because they are asset poor, they own nothing, only have the operational capital and not epic mountains of capital held because they don't have to, they can borrow as needed if needed.

    So for the actual actions, say purchasing a property, it's the 1 person, as it's purchased by the LLC and the 1 person is the authorized signor.

    They do consult with the "money person" but they don't technically have to. It's more a FYI were gonna be doing ____, sound good, great. A second set of eyes, call it internal underwriting. 

    So technically it's not a trustee, it's a managing member of the LLC.

    And it all stems from the "board" at root. Because at the bi-annual meeting there is reviewed update of results from previous planning, planning of whats next, review, decision, and everyone has there marching orders and goes doing it. 

    It's all rather standardized. 

    About biggest "drama" I had seen is when there was a pitch for "what about mini-storage", which we discussed for some time, I equipped them with all the realities of it, we developed a few real world potential, really fleshed it out, "board" meet, reviewed, and decision was made of why chase shinny things when on a good proven known path. So kept to focus and just moving forward from there. 

    That's the long of it all, I hope that answered things. 

    To anyone considering such generational structure, I suggest: 

    - Wyoming as a organization state. Several reasons but primary is case law there, and the way things are set for LLC's, it's a very conducive environment.

    - Use the "asset island" method from start. The trust owns an LLC and does actions thru llc's not itself directly. Separate the assets from the operations soonest possible.

    - Anonymity is almost everything. The best defense against the "slip n fall Jimmys" of the world is to not be a target. WY is also very good for this. 

    For example, do you know what single family rentals are owned by Blackrock? I bet you've seen em and didn't even know. Because it's a company owned by, owned by, owned by.....

  • Stuart UdisPro Member
    Attorney · Philadelphia · Member since 2018 · 2k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    1y

    Cashflow is primarily emphasized by beginner investors...."I want to reach XYZ monthly cash flow to replace my W2" or "I want to accumulate XYZ doors to replace my W2 income"  with a monthly cash flow number attached to each door they look to purchase.  It's a narrative that's pushed through social media, sales brokers, turn key operators etc. It's gotten to a point where C/D located properties in the Midwest are now referred to in these forums as "Midwest Cash Flow Properties",  as if a new asset class has been created. 

    The problem this creates is that of expectation. Many who are buying these properties have an expectation their properties should cash flow xyz per month without understanding the true operational costs because the true operational costs are dismissed by those advising them to make the purchases. Making matters even worse, the properties most are buying (the lower tier properties) are disproportionately impacted by operating costs and cap ex.  The consequence of the unrealistic expectations: buyers becoming terrible operators of their real estate....failing to keep up with cap ex, going the cheapest route on repairs etc. just to maintain the cash flow they expected. Unfortunately this only leads to greater problems down the line because its not sustainable. 

    Nothing exemplifies this better than an interaction I had yesterday in the forums with a fellow poster who bought a $150K turn key house and posted the homes marketing photos. The sidewalks were destroyed and the walk way concrete was off set. Repairing the sidewalk came down to a risk benefit analysis. This was deemed a "Midwest Cash Flow property". If failing to maintain your property is the only way it cash flows, I am sorry but that is not cash flow.  

  • Joe S.Pro Member
    Investor · San Antonio · Member since 2020 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @James Hamling:
    Quote from @Joe S.:
    Quote from @James Hamling:
    Quote from @Ken M.:
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:
    Quote from @Ethan Brackin:
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:
    Quote from @Ethan Brackin:
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:
    Quote from @Ethan Brackin:
    Quote from @Paul Novak:
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:
    Quote from @Paul Novak:

    Marcus I think this was a great post.  I have not subscribed to the stance of trying to get into a property with as little down as possible just to generate cashflow.  I have actually taking the unpopular stance of the exact opposite.  I have tried to focus on properties that are in good locations where I can attract good tenants and then adjusted what I put down to hit my cashflow goals.  Not adjusting for vacancy and maintenance my cashflow goal on a property is $500 per month at a minimum.  We have put down 20 - 40% on some properties to achieve this goal.  Like you said we have been saving upwards of 60% of our W2 income and business cashflow in order to do this.  


    Hi Paul! I think I am just south of you?  Unpopular maybe, but for sure realistic and prudent. Buying quality assets that are in a desirable location and in good condition with a modest amount of leverage is IMO the only approach that I feel comfortable recommending. I have tried pretty much anything personally and I have seen so many investors start and either succeed or fail - well, let's call it abort and sell to never touch RE again.

    And then I get calls from OOS investors who want to buy a 120k duplex in Milwaukee and when I try to tell them what will happen they go: uhm, I don't think we are a good fit. (Which is true, because I do mostly luxury residential, just trying to help)


    Marcus, you are just south. I invest in the Sheboygan area. I agree with your assessments. So much content I see about ways to put as little money down as possible or doing the BRRR method so you can purchase a property and then pull out all the equity so after it's rehabbed you can get all your capital back out. I am not trying to knock those approaches and obviously they have worked great for many people but I feel the market is different then it was in the past. Personally I am not finding deals that could support those strategies in my market today based on my current skills and available time. If I took that approach I would have negative cashflow which isn't a good sustainable business model. I am okay with limited cashflow while I'm in my prime W2 working years but not negative. My business still needs to sustain itself. In my opinion that leaves me with two options. Sit back and wait for the market conditions to flip to where those strategies would work for me, or adapt to the current market. Sitting on the sidelines for me isn't an option. Knowing I'll be holding onto these properties for the next 30 years plus I have no issues with my strategy. I also am not looking for cheep properties in bad locations that could turn a quick buck. I want properties that I am proud to own and if I was personally looking for a rental I would be willing to rent. Obviously that isn't a requirement for most to buy a property but it's something that's important to me. Because I purchase properties like that I feel we attract tenants that we can relate to which helps us on the property management side with communication and working through issues.

    Why do you believe there is a higher likelihood of negative cash flow with BRRRR? Is it because the loan you assume after a cash-out refinance is more likely to be higher than your gross cash flow?

    Hi Ethan, I have been BRRRR-ing in Milwaukee for over a decade and after 2016-2018 or so I had to work increasingly harder to make deals work (much more complex rehabs: mold, foundation issues etc). Today our inventory is so low, that sellers don't have to give me 50% discount because of poor condition. They will find a first time home buyer that will be happy to pay close to what the neighbor's house (in great condition) is worth. If you can find one where you get the price to match the work needed, it is still one of the best strategies! But that's a big IF in 2025.

    The approach that I take now is to let market appreciation and inflation do the heavy lifting for me. We have seen prices go up 8.2% in 2024 here and why would I work hard for half a year to do not that much better, if I can just do nothing instead?

    Money, time and energy are interchangeable in real estate. If you don't have much money, but you do have time and energy, you can use that to find a unicorn deal that will still work with BRRRR.

    Paul?

    Thank you for the thorough response. Do you personally use traditional financing with BRRRR or do you pay for properties with cash? I have read the BRRRR book as well as some other investment books and though I am aware that the author recommends buying properties with all cash, I am still torn between going that route or going with traditional financing instead (or perhaps even a "hybrid" of those two options; saving up to put 40 to even 50% down or more to get higher cash flow and more equity right away, while also being able to forego the waiting process of building up enough capital to invest all-cash in another property again (assuming I don't use a hard-money loan). I'm not sure how this "hybrid" approach would affect the cash-out refinance or if the approach is even viable at all, though. I have never invested before so forgive my ignorance. 

    The most important thing on your first deal is to keep the risk low. You do this buy buying a quality asset in a good enough location. And by not biting off more than you can chew for the rehab. A cosmetic rehab is still quite a challenge for the first time. Paint, carpet, light fixtures, maybe some doors, plus odds and ends - you'll learn a lot! Conventional financing will work for this just fine. Yes you will need a 6 months seasoning period, but by the time you got the work done, a tenant moved in - the 6 months will be almost over. HML is expensive, better to use private money from friends or family. Once you got the first deal under your belt, you can start thinking about the second.

    I did alright on my first 3 rehabs, but got over-confident and #4 was a massive mess and turned out to be a money pit. I took on too much. I remember looking at the $60,000 bank account for the rehab at almost zero, still checks to write and still more work I had not even scheduled yet. I felt physically sick and had to go tell my wife.. The good thing is that rentals are very forgiving and I eventually recovered and years later it even started cashflowing. 


     Your advice is invaluable, thank you! Lastly, do you typically find yourself cash-out refinancing your deals and, if you do, do you set your rent on the higher end to compensate for the increased mortgage costs you will inevitably have to pay after you refinance?




    I am not in favor of growing via cash-out refi. If you just borrow more money, you are getting deeper in debt. As you mentioned, you have to eventually pay it all back, with interest. There is a healthy amount of leverage, but the whole point of investing is to grow equity, and eventually a return on that equity. If you constantly cash-out refi you reduce equity and cash flow.

    That's why I am trying so hard to make the point that you need a business that generates cash so you have money to in-vest on top of what your W2 is making. You don't need to buy a car dealership, it can be a side hustle or an online business.

    If you try to get more rent than fair market, you will rent to desperate tenants, who got rejected everywhere else. We do the opposite. We do everything we can to attract the best tenants possible and have them stay for many years. That's why our rehabs look more like flips and we even finish basements as we target families with kids who want to get into the school district.

    '
    "As you mentioned, you have to eventually pay it all back" - which is true, however you either pay interest (which is tax deductible) and keep the asset, or pay you tax.

    If you never sell, (you will it to your offspring) you never pay tax and they don't pay tax. Which is what we teach our investors how to do. When you sell though, you have the added costs of sales (real estate agents, closing costs etc) and you have the problem of finding the next great deal. 

    Just thoughts for the lurkers.

    That is not correct or accurate. 

    There is tax implications to inheriting property: https://www.irs.gov/faqs/interest-dividends-other-types-of-i...

    There is strategies to mitigate this such as trust but in such your not inheriting the property, there is just adjustments within the trust such as change of managers etc.. 

    Finding a "next great buy" is NOT an issue if doing a strategy for enduring legacy. 

    Example, I have a client who recently transferred the reigns to generation 4, yes 4, of running the family REI Trust.

    They have done 1031's going back generations, to which that tax-can is still getting kicked down field!

    What Great-Grandpa started looooong ago, has now grown into this massive holdings. 

    So what do they do to "find the next great deal"?

    They keep it simple, REAL SIMPLE, they only buy New-Con. 

    They sell an older inventory unit, get all there appreciation and equity liquid, and use it to secure 2 new built units. 

    Growing total holdings, resetting Cap-x clock, roll every dollar into that expanded holdings, and let it run 5-7yrs. 

    On average the entire portfolio keeps doubling every 7yrs. Do you have any clue how massive it's gotten now? Agent fee's etc. for cost of selling is a drop in the bucket compared to the returns. 

    This portfolio has now fully funded over a dozen university tuitions.   

    Because the cash-flow also keeps expanding. 

    Once upon a time they tried just camping out on properties for extended time periods. They found that cap-x kept gobbling up revenues and it was a net-0. BUT net-0 just on the cash-flow differential. What it DID cost them was appreciation, OPPORTUNITY COST, because they were only earning appreciation on that 1 vs the 2 it could have been had they pyramided when available. 

    And pyramiding not only multiplies the appreciation basis, it multiplies the cash-flow potential basis. 

    The math is very clear in this regard, compounding returns always beats static returns. That includes compounding returns basis. 

    Not to mention that as your unit count increases it insulates against impact of vacancy and other unforeseen expenses because each individual unit is mitigated across a larger grouping. This is how insurance works, imagine if an insurance carrier only had 10 people in it, 1 needs a surgery, POW that's a BIG hit. But with a million people 1 needing surgery is pin prick. 

    "But what if 500k need surgery at same time"..... Uh-huh, yeah we call that fantasy land. We have to work in reality sense of numbers not "what-if" ultra extremes of fantasy. 

    If you have 20 units, any 1 vacancy hit's 1/20th of revenues. VS with 2, vacancy in any 1 is 50% hit to revenues. 

    As unit count grows there is an arch of risk exposure that grows, crests, then starts dropping very fast. The trick is getting over that hump to descending risk exposure via unit ct. growth. 


    On the REI Trust where grandpa set up long go… so I'm following that they turn over their old assets and buy new construction and basically double they're holding every seven years.:)

    Does the trustees sign to get new Loans for the new construction properties? How is that set up and is it a pretty smooth transaction? 

    It's a rather extensive "thing" now so probably a bit over the top for most. 

    There is the trust, and the trust has a continuity of control plan. There is a kind of "board" which is assorted family members who meet bi-annually to review, vote, decide on any items they need to. 

    That "board" has a designated person who is the active rep for the "board". Basically a manager. They make sure whatever assorted day-2-days are done. So there is a singular point of contact who's active and not a need to wrangle a whole group for every everything. 

    There is also a second designated person who's a kind of CFO. 

    The trust owns an LLC, let's call it Asset LLC.

    Asset LLC is the ownership of the properties. There is a designated person who is the President/CEO of this LLC. Generally the same person who is the designated rep. for the trust "board".

    There is a second LLC owned by the trust, call it Money LLC. The designated President/CFO is generally the CFO from the trust as well.

    When in process of transferring duties to next persons, the newer persons start in the LLC, eventually take over that role, the exiting person remains on at trust, later bringing in the replacing person to that role as well. It's a process that happens over years.

    There is other actions the trust does than just investment real estate, hence the separation of LLC's.

    Asset LLC will "borrow" funds from Money LLC, as if it were any other private lender. Note is made, interest, whole 9, but kept simplified. I should add; NO, they do NOT do REI in all-cash, ever. They use financing.

    There had been a recent addition of, call it, Landlord LLC. This entity leases property from Asset LLC on NNN basis, via funds "borrowed" from Money LLC, and operates the property for profit as a landlord.

    Thus insulating Asset LLC from public facing liabilities, mitigating risk exposure because they are asset poor, they own nothing, only have the operational capital and not epic mountains of capital held because they don't have to, they can borrow as needed if needed.

    So for the actual actions, say purchasing a property, it's the 1 person, as it's purchased by the LLC and the 1 person is the authorized signor.

    They do consult with the "money person" but they don't technically have to. It's more a FYI were gonna be doing ____, sound good, great. A second set of eyes, call it internal underwriting. 

    So technically it's not a trustee, it's a managing member of the LLC.

    And it all stems from the "board" at root. Because at the bi-annual meeting there is reviewed update of results from previous planning, planning of whats next, review, decision, and everyone has there marching orders and goes doing it. 

    It's all rather standardized. 

    About biggest "drama" I had seen is when there was a pitch for "what about mini-storage", which we discussed for some time, I equipped them with all the realities of it, we developed a few real world potential, really fleshed it out, "board" meet, reviewed, and decision was made of why chase shinny things when on a good proven known path. So kept to focus and just moving forward from there. 

    That's the long of it all, I hope that answered things. 

    To anyone considering such generational structure, I suggest: 

    - Wyoming as a organization state. Several reasons but primary is case law there, and the way things are set for LLC's, it's a very conducive environment.

    - Use the "asset island" method from start. The trust owns an LLC and does actions thru llc's not itself directly. Separate the assets from the operations soonest possible.

    - Anonymity is almost everything. The best defense against the "slip n fall Jimmys" of the world is to not be a target. WY is also very good for this. 

    For example, do you know what single family rentals are owned by Blackrock? I bet you've seen em and didn't even know. Because it's a company owned by, owned by, owned by.....

    It could be a bit over the top for most like you mentioned… Sounds like a well educated crew running it though. The fact that this family is working together to keep this on the tracks is remarkable as well.. 

  • Investor · Milwaukee - Mequon, WI · Member since 2010 · 5k+ posts · 7k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @Stuart Udis:

    Cashflow is primarily emphasized by beginner investors...."I want to reach XYZ monthly cash flow to replace my W2" or "I want to accumulate XYZ doors to replace my W2 income"  with a monthly cash flow number attached to each door they look to purchase.  It's a narrative that's pushed through social media, sales brokers, turn key operators etc. It's gotten to a point where C/D located properties in the Midwest are now referred to in these forums as "Midwest Cash Flow Properties",  as if a new asset class has been created. 

    The problem this creates is that of expectation. Many who are buying these properties have an expectation their properties should cash flow xyz per month without understanding the true operational costs because the true operational costs are dismissed by those advising them to make the purchases. Making matters even worse, the properties most are buying (the lower tier properties) are disproportionately impacted by operating costs and cap ex.  The consequence of the unrealistic expectations: buyers becoming terrible operators of their real estate....failing to keep up with cap ex, going the cheapest route on repairs etc. just to maintain the cash flow they expected. Unfortunately this only leads to greater problems down the line because its not sustainable. 

    Nothing exemplifies this better than an interaction I had yesterday in the forums with a fellow poster who bought a $150K turn key house and posted the homes marketing photos. The sidewalks were destroyed and the walk way concrete was off set. Repairing the sidewalk came down to a risk benefit analysis. This was deemed a "Midwest Cash Flow property". If failing to maintain your property is the only way it cash flows, I am sorry but that is not cash flow.  

    Yes, that's a huge problem. "Midwest Cash Flow Properties" are literally between 60 and 120 years old. Plumbing, windows, driveway, etc - all big ticket items. The problem get's amplified by OOS investors who buy sight unseen and have no idea how bad it is. The problem is that we start seeing public push-back from the DNS (Department of Neighborhood Services, they issue fines) and the press: it gives landlords a bad rep - the newspaper does not differentiate between OOS and local. It just says "landlord" and shows a nasty picture..

    A while ago I got a call from a guy in Texas who was desperate, 3 of his 4 Milwaukee properties have been vacant, PM can't find a tenant for months, pictures look fine, makes no sense. He is a friend of a friend, so I go there and it is immediately clear why nobody is renting. The level of grime and disrepair is absolutely extreme, the house reeks, trash in the yard. PM staff meets me there with the keys and says, yeah we told the owner, but he did not want to pay for anything that exceeded the cash flow.

    I talk to him, he wants out. It took about 15k to clean, paint and band-aid the property to the point where we could fire sale it. Priced at $120k it was surprisingly hard to find a buyer. I am usually selling high-end properties and am used to multiple offers. 

    The first buyer walked after the inspection, not for one particular issue, but for the sum of all of them, inspection reported a lot of "beyond service life" items. Weeks later found another buyer, barely qualified, a pain to work with, does not respond half the time, red flags all over, seller is motivated. We ended up giving massive concessions after the inspection. We thought it was a done deal; buyer did not show for the closing!!  Took me weeks to track him down and sign a CAMR. Meanwhile some dumps 2 old mattresses and a bunch of tires in the front yard. By the time I get my trash guy there, he says there was trash too. I made it work the third time. 

    I think the whole thing took me 4 or 5 months, I think my TC spent more hours on it than we made in commission. 

    Never again!!

  • Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @Joe S.:
    Quote from @James Hamling:
    Quote from @Joe S.:
    Quote from @James Hamling:
    Quote from @Ken M.:
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:
    Quote from @Ethan Brackin:
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:
    Quote from @Ethan Brackin:
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:
    Quote from @Ethan Brackin:
    Quote from @Paul Novak:
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:
    Quote from @Paul Novak:

    Marcus I think this was a great post.  I have not subscribed to the stance of trying to get into a property with as little down as possible just to generate cashflow.  I have actually taking the unpopular stance of the exact opposite.  I have tried to focus on properties that are in good locations where I can attract good tenants and then adjusted what I put down to hit my cashflow goals.  Not adjusting for vacancy and maintenance my cashflow goal on a property is $500 per month at a minimum.  We have put down 20 - 40% on some properties to achieve this goal.  Like you said we have been saving upwards of 60% of our W2 income and business cashflow in order to do this.  


    Hi Paul! I think I am just south of you?  Unpopular maybe, but for sure realistic and prudent. Buying quality assets that are in a desirable location and in good condition with a modest amount of leverage is IMO the only approach that I feel comfortable recommending. I have tried pretty much anything personally and I have seen so many investors start and either succeed or fail - well, let's call it abort and sell to never touch RE again.

    And then I get calls from OOS investors who want to buy a 120k duplex in Milwaukee and when I try to tell them what will happen they go: uhm, I don't think we are a good fit. (Which is true, because I do mostly luxury residential, just trying to help)


    Marcus, you are just south. I invest in the Sheboygan area. I agree with your assessments. So much content I see about ways to put as little money down as possible or doing the BRRR method so you can purchase a property and then pull out all the equity so after it's rehabbed you can get all your capital back out. I am not trying to knock those approaches and obviously they have worked great for many people but I feel the market is different then it was in the past. Personally I am not finding deals that could support those strategies in my market today based on my current skills and available time. If I took that approach I would have negative cashflow which isn't a good sustainable business model. I am okay with limited cashflow while I'm in my prime W2 working years but not negative. My business still needs to sustain itself. In my opinion that leaves me with two options. Sit back and wait for the market conditions to flip to where those strategies would work for me, or adapt to the current market. Sitting on the sidelines for me isn't an option. Knowing I'll be holding onto these properties for the next 30 years plus I have no issues with my strategy. I also am not looking for cheep properties in bad locations that could turn a quick buck. I want properties that I am proud to own and if I was personally looking for a rental I would be willing to rent. Obviously that isn't a requirement for most to buy a property but it's something that's important to me. Because I purchase properties like that I feel we attract tenants that we can relate to which helps us on the property management side with communication and working through issues.

    Why do you believe there is a higher likelihood of negative cash flow with BRRRR? Is it because the loan you assume after a cash-out refinance is more likely to be higher than your gross cash flow?

    Hi Ethan, I have been BRRRR-ing in Milwaukee for over a decade and after 2016-2018 or so I had to work increasingly harder to make deals work (much more complex rehabs: mold, foundation issues etc). Today our inventory is so low, that sellers don't have to give me 50% discount because of poor condition. They will find a first time home buyer that will be happy to pay close to what the neighbor's house (in great condition) is worth. If you can find one where you get the price to match the work needed, it is still one of the best strategies! But that's a big IF in 2025.

    The approach that I take now is to let market appreciation and inflation do the heavy lifting for me. We have seen prices go up 8.2% in 2024 here and why would I work hard for half a year to do not that much better, if I can just do nothing instead?

    Money, time and energy are interchangeable in real estate. If you don't have much money, but you do have time and energy, you can use that to find a unicorn deal that will still work with BRRRR.

    Paul?

    Thank you for the thorough response. Do you personally use traditional financing with BRRRR or do you pay for properties with cash? I have read the BRRRR book as well as some other investment books and though I am aware that the author recommends buying properties with all cash, I am still torn between going that route or going with traditional financing instead (or perhaps even a "hybrid" of those two options; saving up to put 40 to even 50% down or more to get higher cash flow and more equity right away, while also being able to forego the waiting process of building up enough capital to invest all-cash in another property again (assuming I don't use a hard-money loan). I'm not sure how this "hybrid" approach would affect the cash-out refinance or if the approach is even viable at all, though. I have never invested before so forgive my ignorance. 

    The most important thing on your first deal is to keep the risk low. You do this buy buying a quality asset in a good enough location. And by not biting off more than you can chew for the rehab. A cosmetic rehab is still quite a challenge for the first time. Paint, carpet, light fixtures, maybe some doors, plus odds and ends - you'll learn a lot! Conventional financing will work for this just fine. Yes you will need a 6 months seasoning period, but by the time you got the work done, a tenant moved in - the 6 months will be almost over. HML is expensive, better to use private money from friends or family. Once you got the first deal under your belt, you can start thinking about the second.

    I did alright on my first 3 rehabs, but got over-confident and #4 was a massive mess and turned out to be a money pit. I took on too much. I remember looking at the $60,000 bank account for the rehab at almost zero, still checks to write and still more work I had not even scheduled yet. I felt physically sick and had to go tell my wife.. The good thing is that rentals are very forgiving and I eventually recovered and years later it even started cashflowing. 


     Your advice is invaluable, thank you! Lastly, do you typically find yourself cash-out refinancing your deals and, if you do, do you set your rent on the higher end to compensate for the increased mortgage costs you will inevitably have to pay after you refinance?




    I am not in favor of growing via cash-out refi. If you just borrow more money, you are getting deeper in debt. As you mentioned, you have to eventually pay it all back, with interest. There is a healthy amount of leverage, but the whole point of investing is to grow equity, and eventually a return on that equity. If you constantly cash-out refi you reduce equity and cash flow.

    That's why I am trying so hard to make the point that you need a business that generates cash so you have money to in-vest on top of what your W2 is making. You don't need to buy a car dealership, it can be a side hustle or an online business.

    If you try to get more rent than fair market, you will rent to desperate tenants, who got rejected everywhere else. We do the opposite. We do everything we can to attract the best tenants possible and have them stay for many years. That's why our rehabs look more like flips and we even finish basements as we target families with kids who want to get into the school district.

    '
    "As you mentioned, you have to eventually pay it all back" - which is true, however you either pay interest (which is tax deductible) and keep the asset, or pay you tax.

    If you never sell, (you will it to your offspring) you never pay tax and they don't pay tax. Which is what we teach our investors how to do. When you sell though, you have the added costs of sales (real estate agents, closing costs etc) and you have the problem of finding the next great deal. 

    Just thoughts for the lurkers.

    That is not correct or accurate. 

    There is tax implications to inheriting property: https://www.irs.gov/faqs/interest-dividends-other-types-of-i...

    There is strategies to mitigate this such as trust but in such your not inheriting the property, there is just adjustments within the trust such as change of managers etc.. 

    Finding a "next great buy" is NOT an issue if doing a strategy for enduring legacy. 

    Example, I have a client who recently transferred the reigns to generation 4, yes 4, of running the family REI Trust.

    They have done 1031's going back generations, to which that tax-can is still getting kicked down field!

    What Great-Grandpa started looooong ago, has now grown into this massive holdings. 

    So what do they do to "find the next great deal"?

    They keep it simple, REAL SIMPLE, they only buy New-Con. 

    They sell an older inventory unit, get all there appreciation and equity liquid, and use it to secure 2 new built units. 

    Growing total holdings, resetting Cap-x clock, roll every dollar into that expanded holdings, and let it run 5-7yrs. 

    On average the entire portfolio keeps doubling every 7yrs. Do you have any clue how massive it's gotten now? Agent fee's etc. for cost of selling is a drop in the bucket compared to the returns. 

    This portfolio has now fully funded over a dozen university tuitions.   

    Because the cash-flow also keeps expanding. 

    Once upon a time they tried just camping out on properties for extended time periods. They found that cap-x kept gobbling up revenues and it was a net-0. BUT net-0 just on the cash-flow differential. What it DID cost them was appreciation, OPPORTUNITY COST, because they were only earning appreciation on that 1 vs the 2 it could have been had they pyramided when available. 

    And pyramiding not only multiplies the appreciation basis, it multiplies the cash-flow potential basis. 

    The math is very clear in this regard, compounding returns always beats static returns. That includes compounding returns basis. 

    Not to mention that as your unit count increases it insulates against impact of vacancy and other unforeseen expenses because each individual unit is mitigated across a larger grouping. This is how insurance works, imagine if an insurance carrier only had 10 people in it, 1 needs a surgery, POW that's a BIG hit. But with a million people 1 needing surgery is pin prick. 

    "But what if 500k need surgery at same time"..... Uh-huh, yeah we call that fantasy land. We have to work in reality sense of numbers not "what-if" ultra extremes of fantasy. 

    If you have 20 units, any 1 vacancy hit's 1/20th of revenues. VS with 2, vacancy in any 1 is 50% hit to revenues. 

    As unit count grows there is an arch of risk exposure that grows, crests, then starts dropping very fast. The trick is getting over that hump to descending risk exposure via unit ct. growth. 


    On the REI Trust where grandpa set up long go… so I'm following that they turn over their old assets and buy new construction and basically double they're holding every seven years.:)

    Does the trustees sign to get new Loans for the new construction properties? How is that set up and is it a pretty smooth transaction? 

    It's a rather extensive "thing" now so probably a bit over the top for most. 

    There is the trust, and the trust has a continuity of control plan. There is a kind of "board" which is assorted family members who meet bi-annually to review, vote, decide on any items they need to. 

    That "board" has a designated person who is the active rep for the "board". Basically a manager. They make sure whatever assorted day-2-days are done. So there is a singular point of contact who's active and not a need to wrangle a whole group for every everything. 

    There is also a second designated person who's a kind of CFO. 

    The trust owns an LLC, let's call it Asset LLC.

    Asset LLC is the ownership of the properties. There is a designated person who is the President/CEO of this LLC. Generally the same person who is the designated rep. for the trust "board".

    There is a second LLC owned by the trust, call it Money LLC. The designated President/CFO is generally the CFO from the trust as well.

    When in process of transferring duties to next persons, the newer persons start in the LLC, eventually take over that role, the exiting person remains on at trust, later bringing in the replacing person to that role as well. It's a process that happens over years.

    There is other actions the trust does than just investment real estate, hence the separation of LLC's.

    Asset LLC will "borrow" funds from Money LLC, as if it were any other private lender. Note is made, interest, whole 9, but kept simplified. I should add; NO, they do NOT do REI in all-cash, ever. They use financing.

    There had been a recent addition of, call it, Landlord LLC. This entity leases property from Asset LLC on NNN basis, via funds "borrowed" from Money LLC, and operates the property for profit as a landlord.

    Thus insulating Asset LLC from public facing liabilities, mitigating risk exposure because they are asset poor, they own nothing, only have the operational capital and not epic mountains of capital held because they don't have to, they can borrow as needed if needed.

    So for the actual actions, say purchasing a property, it's the 1 person, as it's purchased by the LLC and the 1 person is the authorized signor.

    They do consult with the "money person" but they don't technically have to. It's more a FYI were gonna be doing ____, sound good, great. A second set of eyes, call it internal underwriting. 

    So technically it's not a trustee, it's a managing member of the LLC.

    And it all stems from the "board" at root. Because at the bi-annual meeting there is reviewed update of results from previous planning, planning of whats next, review, decision, and everyone has there marching orders and goes doing it. 

    It's all rather standardized. 

    About biggest "drama" I had seen is when there was a pitch for "what about mini-storage", which we discussed for some time, I equipped them with all the realities of it, we developed a few real world potential, really fleshed it out, "board" meet, reviewed, and decision was made of why chase shinny things when on a good proven known path. So kept to focus and just moving forward from there. 

    That's the long of it all, I hope that answered things. 

    To anyone considering such generational structure, I suggest: 

    - Wyoming as a organization state. Several reasons but primary is case law there, and the way things are set for LLC's, it's a very conducive environment.

    - Use the "asset island" method from start. The trust owns an LLC and does actions thru llc's not itself directly. Separate the assets from the operations soonest possible.

    - Anonymity is almost everything. The best defense against the "slip n fall Jimmys" of the world is to not be a target. WY is also very good for this. 

    For example, do you know what single family rentals are owned by Blackrock? I bet you've seen em and didn't even know. Because it's a company owned by, owned by, owned by.....

    It could be a bit over the top for most like you mentioned… Sounds like a well educated crew running it though. The fact that this family is working together to keep this on the tracks is remarkable as well..  

    It's rather low to no input for most though. There only work of it is getting together twice a year, which as you can guess coincides with x-mas season and around July 4th, when there doing family gatherings already. 
    I think it add's a bit more "glue" to keeping a family together. 

    And as mentioned, it does more then just REI, has funded tuitions, made auto loans, down payment loans and assistance for O.O. homes etc.. 

    That is significant differentiator itself, if your family is the bank to which your paying your loan interest to. Vs Wells Fargo or whomever. 

    REI was the seed that grew into this Oak grove, and keeps it going through any "storms". 

    It seems that every 30'ish years there is 2 people who rise up in the Fam that have an interest in the CFO or REI aspect, and they are the ones groomed for the job's. 
  • Property Manager · Nashville, TN · Member since 2018 · 22 posts · 16 votes
    1y
    What you are saying makes sense. I love my job and plan to do this type of work forever. However, I love the idea of STR. I used to help managed STR's in Nashville. Now I have my first which is a house hack. We are itching to get another.

    Our current STR has COC return of 43%, we are making on average $12,480 a year. 
    If I am hearing you correctly, you are suggesting that I focus on the long term instead of short term cash flow. 

    I want to get a second property. However I don't have enough cash budgeted out to put a down payment on a second STR. Based on your advice to newer investors, should I play the long term game by paying off my house early (2030)? We bought the house for $310k and it recently appraised for $400k. 


    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:
    Quote from @Allan C.:

    You both make good points, but like everything else the points are not absolute. Well, I fully align with Marcus that the largest value of REI is equity growth via debt paydown and appreciation. Debt paydown in my markets is 1-2x FCF and appreciation is 3-5x FCF.

    I also agree with Joe in minimizing dead equity. However I favor refi as the means of equity stripping instead of selling. So many transaction inefficiencies with selling & buying... and I don't sell because I already have a stable asset that I know well. 


    Yes, it takes a while to stabilize an asset. And frankly we tend to over-improve a little bit, because I don't want to touch a house again in the next decade or two. For example, we replace marginal roofs, rip out all the old galvanized plumbing because it saves me a lot over the long run. Wouldn't do that for 3-7 years.

    I understand what Joe is saying, but it's a little beside my point I want to make to new investors: short-term cash flow to replace W2 with little capital is not a viable strategy. 

    If cash flow is what you are after, set up a coffee trailer, wash houses, sell digital assets, launch a Shopify store, set up ATMs, buy a title company, coin laundry, a party rental business a car body shop etc.. and then invest the cash flow in real estate!


  • Investor · Milwaukee - Mequon, WI · Member since 2010 · 5k+ posts · 7k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @Scott Anderle:
    What you are saying makes sense. I love my job and plan to do this type of work forever. However, I love the idea of STR. I used to help managed STR's in Nashville. Now I have my first which is a house hack. We are itching to get another.

    Our current STR has COC return of 43%, we are making on average $12,480 a year. 
    If I am hearing you correctly, you are suggesting that I focus on the long term instead of short term cash flow. 

    I want to get a second property. However I don't have enough cash budgeted out to put a down payment on a second STR. Based on your advice to newer investors, should I play the long term game by paying off my house early (2030)? We bought the house for $310k and it recently appraised for $400k. 


    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:
    Quote from @Allan C.:

    You both make good points, but like everything else the points are not absolute. Well, I fully align with Marcus that the largest value of REI is equity growth via debt paydown and appreciation. Debt paydown in my markets is 1-2x FCF and appreciation is 3-5x FCF.

    I also agree with Joe in minimizing dead equity. However I favor refi as the means of equity stripping instead of selling. So many transaction inefficiencies with selling & buying... and I don't sell because I already have a stable asset that I know well. 


    Yes, it takes a while to stabilize an asset. And frankly we tend to over-improve a little bit, because I don't want to touch a house again in the next decade or two. For example, we replace marginal roofs, rip out all the old galvanized plumbing because it saves me a lot over the long run. Wouldn't do that for 3-7 years.

    I understand what Joe is saying, but it's a little beside my point I want to make to new investors: short-term cash flow to replace W2 with little capital is not a viable strategy. 

    If cash flow is what you are after, set up a coffee trailer, wash houses, sell digital assets, launch a Shopify store, set up ATMs, buy a title company, coin laundry, a party rental business a car body shop etc.. and then invest the cash flow in real estate!



    For the type of investment, I would say follow your passion. If STR is fun, then do it. Your numbers look great! What I am saying is businesses generate cash, real estate generates wealth (equity). It's slow to build a portfolio on just W2 income, but however slow it is still life-changing, lastest for your retirement. But to accelerate things I'd look to raise additional income, ideally from a side business, and then invest in quality real estate.

    I believe you should grow your portfolio-wide (more properties), before at some point you decide to grow it deep (paying off debt). You can't do both at the same time, so there is a distinct change in strategy when you have to say it's enough. This is easier said than done, I struggle with it and flip back and forth, but real life seems to be never a straight line and more zig-zag. The last thing I would do is aggressively pay off my personal residence, especially if you have a low % mortgage. Let inflation do it's thing for another 10 years. As Charlie Monger once said: our operating assumption is that the USD is going towards zero. Rather buy another STR. Or LTR.

  • Member since 2025 · 5 posts · 0 votes
    1y

    Makes sense.

  • Member since 2025 · 5 posts · 0 votes
    1y
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:

    Hear me out.

    Over the last years, more and more of the BP discussions circle around cash flow. As LTR was getting harder 2018-2020 STR became the new thing everyone started chasing. Until that started getting difficult. So now what?

    The idea aspiring investors get mesmerized with is basically to start in real estate and somehow build a portfolio out of thin air. And gurus are happy to feed that dream. Basically, they suggest to buy a property with very little money, collect the cashflow, then refinance to pull money out of the property, buy more real estate for more cash flow and quit the W2 they hate.

    The first flaw is that a lot of the books written before 2020 will tell you to analyze more deals until you find one that cashflows. The problem is that the market landscape has fundamentally shifted. Back then looking at more deals would eventually get you a "quality" deal, today it will get you a deal in the hood. And as you can read here on BP this is probably the number one recipe for financial failure. Best case, you learn a lot, survive financially and trade up. You certainly won't achieve any significant wealth in that asset class. The second flaw is the idea that you can refinance your way to wealth - that has always been very risky even with low interest rates.

    It is called in-vesting for a reason. You are putting money in. Let me explain.

    The goal of real estate investing is to allocate your capital in a low-risk investment that grows your net worth predictably over long periods of time - think at least decades if not longer! The superpower of real estate investing is equity growth: the asset appreciates, while inflation and loan payments erode the underlying debt until you own the asset free and clear and can leverage it again. When you run numbers in a BP calculator you can see quickly that equity gains DWARF cash flow. So, for anyone who wants to go into real estate primarily for cash flow, they have not yet understood the concept! 

    Don't get me wrong:  cash flow is still an important factor, it keeps the lights on, it pays for repairs and upgrades. And eventually, it helps you buy more real estate (until when you start milking your portfolio to cover your living expenses).

    If cash flow is what you want, buy a business. 

    A business has an inverted financial profile: it is literally designed for cash flow. That's the main objective. And not just $200 per month per door (which has been the long-standing average, at least here in Milwaukee) Yes, you can also create equity with a business, if you are growing it to a size where it becomes a sellable asset, you replace yourself, hire a manager and a team of workers. But ask anyone who ever sold a business: it is not easy!! That's why many businesses just close instead of being sold.

    Real estate investing provides a lot more creative angles than the stock market, but on a conceptual level, nobody would seriously attempt to replace their W2 income in a few years by investing a few thousand dollars in the stock market. In a way, STR is a hybrid because while real estate is part of it, you are really running a one-room hotel.

    So if you are an aspiring real estate investor, the first question you should ask is where do I have a consistent source of free cash that I can use to invest? That can be excess income from your W2 job, or it can be a business you run on the side. Then you can take that cash and buy quality real estate, accumulate the cash flow and grow your portfolio-wide before you grow it deep - meaning paying off loans. 

    The day you start siphoning cash flow out of your real estate portfolio, you are stifling future growth. So you will have to decide if your portfolio has grown enough to support your goals and dreams at that point. Otherwise, keep pushing!


     That makes sense. 

  • Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes
    1y

    Uh-oh @Marcus Auerbach, pulling out the Charlie Monger and economics. 

    It get's me how almost everyone, still, says things in the frame works of why did things get so much more expensive..... 

    If you point out it didn't, the dollar got worth less.... deer in headlights, blank stares and a "huh". 

    USD has lost 74% of it's value since only 1980. 

    Bonkers....... 

    For those who don't follow what this all means. It means a $100k purchase, like a home, in 1980 is exactly equal to a $368,615.38 purchase today.     They are the exact same.

    So everyone thinking that people "made so much $" from there 2019 property buy vs today. Nope, probably haven't made a dime. Call it a dollar devaluation adjusted savings account. 

  • Investor · Milwaukee - Mequon, WI · Member since 2010 · 5k+ posts · 7k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @James Hamling:

    Uh-oh @Marcus Auerbach, pulling out the Charlie Monger and economics. 

    It get's me how almost everyone, still, says things in the frame works of why did things get so much more expensive..... 

    If you point out it didn't, the dollar got worth less.... deer in headlights, blank stares and a "huh". 

    USD has lost 74% of it's value since only 1980. 

    Bonkers....... 

    For those who don't follow what this all means. It means a $100k purchase, like a home, in 1980 is exactly equal to a $368,615.38 purchase today.     They are the exact same.

    So everyone thinking that people "made so much $" from there 2019 property buy vs today. Nope, probably haven't made a dime. Call it a dollar devaluation adjusted savings account. 

    You are right a large percentage of the population (outside of BP) does not intuitively understand what inflation actually is. I have found most get it when you go back further in time.

    $14,990 was the cost of a brand new brick ranch home on May 1st 1960 - I have the original advertising from the builder in Ann Arbor. And the buyers took out a 30 year mortgage to pay it off (hopefully before 1990).

    The average rent in 1960 was $61 per month and median income $5,600  - - per year!!
    This is inflation.

    Leveraged REI uses this principle by connecting two points in time with a hard asset, and taking advantage of it by paying off an asset that you bought for yesterday's cost with tomorrow's money - it's like a financial wormhole

  • Rental Property Investor · San Francisco Bay Area · Member since 2022 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    1y

    @Marcus Auerbach

    If I could up vote your post 100 times, I would. I didn't think to scale until I heard the social media gurus saying how many doors they have and "cash flowing enough to replace your W2 income." I have 3 appreciating properties (1 SFH in Bay Area, 1 MF Bay Area and 1 SFH Indianapolis great suburb with excellent schools). Two people suggested to me to sell the Bay Area SFH which has a lot of equity to buy an apartment building OOS or multiple SFHs/2 to 4 units in an inexpensive location (Midwest, parts of the South) to cash flow more.

    I'm glad I didn't take that advice because that California SFH would be gone, which has a relatively low property tax base (max of 2% tax increase a year due to California's Proposition 13). And my property taxes and probably repair expenses would skyrocket owning multiple OOS properties or an apartment complex in an unknown market 2000 miles away.

    After my experience of buying 2 Class C Indianapolis properties in 2023 "cash flow on paper" I saw the writing on the wall. I have been -$300 to -$500 most months owning on C#1 for 2 years. On a good month I net $71 a month (previously $176 a month before 17% increase in property tax).  I hope this house eventually stabilizes. I sold C#2 while it was vacant. Many of my California investor friends believed the same things about CF OOS.  Or I've seen a few of them pay cash or do 50% down payments, which of course they will "cash flow" (I'm not a fan or doing over 20% to 25% down). Not saying buying OOS is bad but I think bought the wrong properties, should have looked at the actual asset instead of projected numbers on a spreadsheet but I did feel that I did lots of due diligence by talking to local investors. Maybe I just have terrible luck. 

    I've seen a few people post that they don't hold the property long, 7 to 10 years and 1031 exchange to something better. If I were to sell off the Indiana Class A  and C homes, the numbers don't look good with high prices and over 7% interest rates to 1031 to California or Nevada if I'm looking at buying an appreciating asset. Cash flow decreasing on Class A because I don't do large rent increases on my great tenant (maybe slightly under market rent) and large property tax increases. 

    My thought is to hold onto the Class A (and my CA properties) and pass it onto my kids and they can take the step up basis and sell them without the capital gains tax hit or if they want to continue renting them out. I'm investigating starting a business to cash flow but this would be a lot of work along with a W2 job. 

  • Chicago · Member since 2018 · 216 posts · 165 votes
    1y
    Quote from @Joe Villeneuve:
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:

    Totally agree with having both, that's IMO a balanced investment. But why would you sell a property that is performing well? Amongst other issues selling will cost you at least 6%. And then you have to find another one, 1031 etc. If the asset continues to perform well, why would you sell it, like.. ever?

    And to clarify, you are leaning heavey towards cash flow? If your trigger point is to accumulate CF to match your original cash outlay (buy+rehab). If you have a unit that cashflows $200 per month, $2400 per year it takes 10-30 years to get there depending on how much you originally spent. Whereas, if appreciation just follows inflation (no real gain) you reach your equity goal within 10 years, at the moment more like 3-5 years.

    In either case, it takes time. If a new investor wants to get started and use cash flow as a propellant to grow, it has to come from somewhere else and not from the first property they bought.

    A property that is gaining equity isn't performing well, it's losing value.  Your assumption that gained equity defines a performing property is wrong.  It's actually the opposite.  Let's look at the numbers:
    1 - Property bought at $100k, paid 20% DP ($20k) cash = 20%/$20k equity.
    2 - Property gains $20k in value, and thus $20k in appreciation.  New PV is $120k, and new equity is $40k.  Sounds good, right?  Wrong.  You think you gained $40k in equity, but you really doubled the cost of the property from $20k to $40k.
    3 - With new values, you are paying $40k for a property worth $120k,...that's a 3 to 1 ratio.  You started with a 5 to 1 ratio.
    4 - Sell that property and that $40k in equity, the same equity, now goes back to a 5 to 1 ratio, and buys you a property worth $200k.  That's an $80k difference/loss.
    Notice I didn't mention the paydown, that's because I don't count it in the new equity.  This paydown is usually enough to cover the closing costs.

    In my experience, it takes between 3 to 7 years for the CF to payback my costs, and the equity to double.

    I never said this happens overnight.  Of course it takes time, but not that much time, and as you continue to move your equity forward as it grows, you are gaining an exponential return, not a linear one.

     Why would you sell, tho, if you can merely refinance and pull out your equity cash free? 

    The investors I know that have hundreds of units with portfolios worth in the hundreds of millions NEVER sell. They repay the investors with a refinancing event in five years or whatever the time frame is. That way the pay the investors back with all or most of their money while their investment carries on and they use that money to invest in another deal. 

    But the main point is a good one: I keep buying for cash flow but I keep putting the cash flow back into building upgrades, push up the rents, and the appreciation has been astounding. I'm about to refinance one deal and get my entire downpayment out. I refinanced a different building and bought another building with the proceeds.

    This is the magic of Real Estate. You own an asset and it's appreciation with a downpayment of only a fraction of its price. Essentially, 80 percent of your appreciation is on an asset that the bank owns. 

  • Joe VilleneuvePro Member
    Plymouth, MI · Member since 2013 · 13k+ posts · 19k+ votes
    1y

    Refinancing isn't pulling out cash free.  Also, you're only accessing part of the equity,...and, since the principal on the new loan will be higher with the refi, your mortgage payment will also be higher, so your CF will go down.

    Refinancing isn't the same thing as selling.  Refinancing is only a linear return, selling is an exponential return. I'm looking at a spread sheet I use to show this to my students, and the difference over time is quick, is rather large.

    • Chicago · Member since 2018 · 216 posts · 165 votes
      1y
      Quote from @Joe Villeneuve:

      Refinancing isn't pulling out cash free.  Also, you're only accessing part of the equity,...and, since the principal on the new loan will be higher with the refi, your mortgage payment will also be higher, so your CF will go down.

      Refinancing isn't the same thing as selling.  Refinancing is only a linear return, selling is an exponential return. I'm looking at a spread sheet I use to show this to my students, and the difference over time is quick, is rather large.


       But if you sell you miss out on the greatest tax savings of all: the step up basis at death. My goal is for my daughter to inherit my properties at the new step up basis. She can sell some to pay off the rest or enjoy the cash flow or appreciation and keep it rolling. 



    • Joe VilleneuvePro Member
      Plymouth, MI · Member since 2013 · 13k+ posts · 19k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Tom O.:
      Quote from @Joe Villeneuve:

      Refinancing isn't pulling out cash free.  Also, you're only accessing part of the equity,...and, since the principal on the new loan will be higher with the refi, your mortgage payment will also be higher, so your CF will go down.

      Refinancing isn't the same thing as selling.  Refinancing is only a linear return, selling is an exponential return. I'm looking at a spread sheet I use to show this to my students, and the difference over time is quick, is rather large.


       But if you sell you miss out on the greatest tax savings of all: the step up basis at death. My goal is for my daughter to inherit my properties at the new step up basis. She can sell some to pay off the rest or enjoy the cash flow or appreciation and keep it rolling. 



      How is that missed?
  • Joe S.Pro Member
    Investor · San Antonio · Member since 2020 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @Joe Villeneuve:

    Refinancing isn't pulling out cash free.  Also, you're only accessing part of the equity,...and, since the principal on the new loan will be higher with the refi, your mortgage payment will also be higher, so your CF will go down.

    Refinancing isn't the same thing as selling.  Refinancing is only a linear return, selling is an exponential return. I'm looking at a spread sheet I use to show this to my students, and the difference over time is quick, is rather large.

    Joe, Is it possible to share your spreadsheet??

    Like I said on a post before. On occasion with refinances I have had properties appraise for way more than I could’ve sold them for on the open market. . So in a case like that, I feel that I did better on the refinance. Of course I have had properties that I was trying to refinance before that appraised for considerably lower than I was hoping for so on those I did not refinance them. 

    I for one have had less than stellar results trying to force a property to sell for cash on the open market at top dollar. Maybe I just didn’t time it right like a PRO such as yourself has done. :-)

  • Investor · Milwaukee - Mequon, WI · Member since 2010 · 5k+ posts · 7k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @Becca F.:

    @Marcus Auerbach

    If I could up vote your post 100 times, I would. I didn't think to scale until I heard the social media gurus saying how many doors they have and "cash flowing enough to replace your W2 income." I have 3 appreciating properties (1 SFH in Bay Area, 1 MF Bay Area and 1 SFH Indianapolis great suburb with excellent schools). Two people suggested to me to sell the Bay Area SFH which has a lot of equity to buy an apartment building OOS or multiple SFHs/2 to 4 units in an inexpensive location (Midwest, parts of the South) to cash flow more.

    I'm glad I didn't take that advice because that California SFH would be gone, which has a relatively low property tax base (max of 2% tax increase a year due to California's Proposition 13). And my property taxes and probably repair expenses would skyrocket owning multiple OOS properties or an apartment complex in an unknown market 2000 miles away.

    After my experience of buying 2 Class C Indianapolis properties in 2023 "cash flow on paper" I saw the writing on the wall. I have been -$300 to -$500 most months owning on C#1 for 2 years. On a good month I net $71 a month (previously $176 a month before 17% increase in property tax).  I hope this house eventually stabilizes. I sold C#2 while it was vacant. Many of my California investor friends believed the same things about CF OOS.  Or I've seen a few of them pay cash or do 50% down payments, which of course they will "cash flow" (I'm not a fan or doing over 20% to 25% down). Not saying buying OOS is bad but I think bought the wrong properties, should have looked at the actual asset instead of projected numbers on a spreadsheet but I did feel that I did lots of due diligence by talking to local investors. Maybe I just have terrible luck. 

    I've seen a few people post that they don't hold the property long, 7 to 10 years and 1031 exchange to something better. If I were to sell off the Indiana Class A  and C homes, the numbers don't look good with high prices and over 7% interest rates to 1031 to California or Nevada if I'm looking at buying an appreciating asset. Cash flow decreasing on Class A because I don't do large rent increases on my great tenant (maybe slightly under market rent) and large property tax increases. 

    My thought is to hold onto the Class A (and my CA properties) and pass it onto my kids and they can take the step up basis and sell them without the capital gains tax hit or if they want to continue renting them out. I'm investigating starting a business to cash flow but this would be a lot of work along with a W2 job. 

     Thanks Becca! It's good to test things and see what works for you and what doesn't. I have bought some cheap SFRs in I believe 2013, because I was looking for ways to stretch my capital. I sold them over the next couple years to the tenants and I am glad I did. That neighborhood has not seen much of an improvement over the last 10 years..

    If an agent is selling a property and calls it a C neighborhood in the back of my head I always wonder if they are looking at it through rose-colored glasses. The definition seems to be: "if I can think of a worse neighborhood then this must be a C".

    My definition is to look at the median price for the city or metro area. Median is the deviding line between B and C. The two  (equally sized) quarters above median are A and B, the two quarters below median are C and D. Class A neighborhoods are completely unviable as investments, even B+ makes almost no financial sense. IMO it is really just above median (B-) and just below (C+) where it makes the most sense for a balanced approach

  • Joe VilleneuvePro Member
    Plymouth, MI · Member since 2013 · 13k+ posts · 19k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @Joe S.:
    Quote from @Joe Villeneuve:

    Refinancing isn't pulling out cash free.  Also, you're only accessing part of the equity,...and, since the principal on the new loan will be higher with the refi, your mortgage payment will also be higher, so your CF will go down.

    Refinancing isn't the same thing as selling.  Refinancing is only a linear return, selling is an exponential return. I'm looking at a spread sheet I use to show this to my students, and the difference over time is quick, is rather large.

    Joe, Is it possible to share your spreadsheet??

    Like I said on a post before. On occasion with refinances I have had properties appraise for way more than I could’ve sold them for on the open market. . So in a case like that, I feel that I did better on the refinance. Of course I have had properties that I was trying to refinance before that appraised for considerably lower than I was hoping for so on those I did not refinance them. 

    I for one have had less than stellar results trying to force a property to sell for cash on the open market at top dollar. Maybe I just didn’t time it right like a PRO such as yourself has done. :-)

    Maybe, I'm in the middle of redoing/adding to it.  I'm always doing this...LOL.  It would be a problem if I made it available now, with parts leading to nowhere, and without detailed explanations of how it works and why.  It would also be a disservice to my students if I just handed it out.

    It's not that hard to do one, a simple one, that would serve this purpose.  Mine have a tendency to be rather involved going beyond the original reason for doing it.

  • Investor · Milwaukee - Mequon, WI · Member since 2010 · 5k+ posts · 7k+ votes
    1y

    @Joe S. selling a rental property is not easy. You almost have to treat it like a flip, before selling it to get top dollar. And of course never sell it with a tenant in place, because then you can only sell it to another investor - who wants a discount.

    Cash-out refi appraisals are often very conservative because they don't have a contract price to benchmark. So they err on the side of caution, as they should. Sounds like you were lucky!

    I don't think there is a black-and-white decision between selling and refi. Like everything in our world you have to look at it more holistically. At a minimum where is that local market headed, what is your personal strategy, are you in the growing phase or beyond etc

    One really strong argument for selling is that you can upgrade big times. Made up numbers for concept: you bought a 100k property with 20k down, after 10 years you sell it for 200k, now 120k+ cash, 1031 exchange it into a 500k property. Wait until 1 million (10 years), trade into a 3 million building etc

  • Joe S.Pro Member
    Investor · San Antonio · Member since 2020 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @Joe Villeneuve:
    Quote from @Joe S.:
    Quote from @Joe Villeneuve:

    Refinancing isn't pulling out cash free.  Also, you're only accessing part of the equity,...and, since the principal on the new loan will be higher with the refi, your mortgage payment will also be higher, so your CF will go down.

    Refinancing isn't the same thing as selling.  Refinancing is only a linear return, selling is an exponential return. I'm looking at a spread sheet I use to show this to my students, and the difference over time is quick, is rather large.

    Joe, Is it possible to share your spreadsheet??

    Like I said on a post before. On occasion with refinances I have had properties appraise for way more than I could’ve sold them for on the open market. . So in a case like that, I feel that I did better on the refinance. Of course I have had properties that I was trying to refinance before that appraised for considerably lower than I was hoping for so on those I did not refinance them. 

    I for one have had less than stellar results trying to force a property to sell for cash on the open market at top dollar. Maybe I just didn’t time it right like a PRO such as yourself has done. :-)

    Maybe, I'm in the middle of redoing/adding to it.  I'm always doing this...LOL.  It would be a problem if I made it available now, with parts leading to nowhere, and without detailed explanations of how it works and why.  It would also be a disservice to my students if I just handed it out.

    It's not that hard to do one, a simple one, that would serve this purpose.  Mine have a tendency to be rather involved going beyond the original reason for doing it.

    Understandable. BTW I enjoy reading your posts.:)
  • Joe S.Pro Member
    Investor · San Antonio · Member since 2020 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:

    @Joe S. selling a rental property is not easy. You almost have to treat it like a flip, before selling it to get top dollar. And of course never sell it with a tenant in place, because then you can only sell it to another investor - who wants a discount.

    Cash-out refi appraisals are often very conservative because they don't have a contract price to benchmark. So they err on the side of caution, as they should. Sounds like you were lucky!

    I don't think there is a black-and-white decision between selling and refi. Like everything in our world you have to look at it more holistically. At a minimum where is that local market headed, what is your personal strategy, are you in the growing phase or beyond etc

    One really strong argument for selling is that you can upgrade big times. Made up numbers for concept: you bought a 100k property with 20k down, after 10 years you sell it for 200k, now 120k+ cash, 1031 exchange it into a 500k property. Wait until 1 million (10 years), trade into a 3 million building etc


     Good points… I agree that selling a property with a tenant inside is not ideal.. 

  • Joe VilleneuvePro Member
    Plymouth, MI · Member since 2013 · 13k+ posts · 19k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @Joe S.:
    Quote from @Joe Villeneuve:
    Quote from @Joe S.:
    Quote from @Joe Villeneuve:

    Refinancing isn't pulling out cash free.  Also, you're only accessing part of the equity,...and, since the principal on the new loan will be higher with the refi, your mortgage payment will also be higher, so your CF will go down.

    Refinancing isn't the same thing as selling.  Refinancing is only a linear return, selling is an exponential return. I'm looking at a spread sheet I use to show this to my students, and the difference over time is quick, is rather large.

    Joe, Is it possible to share your spreadsheet??

    Like I said on a post before. On occasion with refinances I have had properties appraise for way more than I could’ve sold them for on the open market. . So in a case like that, I feel that I did better on the refinance. Of course I have had properties that I was trying to refinance before that appraised for considerably lower than I was hoping for so on those I did not refinance them. 

    I for one have had less than stellar results trying to force a property to sell for cash on the open market at top dollar. Maybe I just didn’t time it right like a PRO such as yourself has done. :-)

    Maybe, I'm in the middle of redoing/adding to it.  I'm always doing this...LOL.  It would be a problem if I made it available now, with parts leading to nowhere, and without detailed explanations of how it works and why.  It would also be a disservice to my students if I just handed it out.

    It's not that hard to do one, a simple one, that would serve this purpose.  Mine have a tendency to be rather involved going beyond the original reason for doing it.

    Understandable. BTW I enjoy reading your posts.:)
    Feeling is mutual. 
  • Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @Tom O.:
    Quote from @Joe Villeneuve:
    Quote from @Marcus Auerbach:

    Totally agree with having both, that's IMO a balanced investment. But why would you sell a property that is performing well? Amongst other issues selling will cost you at least 6%. And then you have to find another one, 1031 etc. If the asset continues to perform well, why would you sell it, like.. ever?

    And to clarify, you are leaning heavey towards cash flow? If your trigger point is to accumulate CF to match your original cash outlay (buy+rehab). If you have a unit that cashflows $200 per month, $2400 per year it takes 10-30 years to get there depending on how much you originally spent. Whereas, if appreciation just follows inflation (no real gain) you reach your equity goal within 10 years, at the moment more like 3-5 years.

    In either case, it takes time. If a new investor wants to get started and use cash flow as a propellant to grow, it has to come from somewhere else and not from the first property they bought.

    A property that is gaining equity isn't performing well, it's losing value.  Your assumption that gained equity defines a performing property is wrong.  It's actually the opposite.  Let's look at the numbers:
    1 - Property bought at $100k, paid 20% DP ($20k) cash = 20%/$20k equity.
    2 - Property gains $20k in value, and thus $20k in appreciation.  New PV is $120k, and new equity is $40k.  Sounds good, right?  Wrong.  You think you gained $40k in equity, but you really doubled the cost of the property from $20k to $40k.
    3 - With new values, you are paying $40k for a property worth $120k,...that's a 3 to 1 ratio.  You started with a 5 to 1 ratio.
    4 - Sell that property and that $40k in equity, the same equity, now goes back to a 5 to 1 ratio, and buys you a property worth $200k.  That's an $80k difference/loss.
    Notice I didn't mention the paydown, that's because I don't count it in the new equity.  This paydown is usually enough to cover the closing costs.

    In my experience, it takes between 3 to 7 years for the CF to payback my costs, and the equity to double.

    I never said this happens overnight.  Of course it takes time, but not that much time, and as you continue to move your equity forward as it grows, you are gaining an exponential return, not a linear one.

     Why would you sell, tho, if you can merely refinance and pull out your equity cash free? 

    The investors I know that have hundreds of units with portfolios worth in the hundreds of millions NEVER sell. They repay the investors with a refinancing event in five years or whatever the time frame is. That way the pay the investors back with all or most of their money while their investment carries on and they use that money to invest in another deal. 

    But the main point is a good one: I keep buying for cash flow but I keep putting the cash flow back into building upgrades, push up the rents, and the appreciation has been astounding. I'm about to refinance one deal and get my entire downpayment out. I refinanced a different building and bought another building with the proceeds.

    This is the magic of Real Estate. You own an asset and it's appreciation with a downpayment of only a fraction of its price. Essentially, 80 percent of your appreciation is on an asset that the bank owns. 

    "Why would you sell, tho, if you can merely refinance and pull out your equity cash free?"

    There is a few standout reasons of logical sense. 

    - First is GROWTH: If a person is in growth phase for portfolio building, refi only access's a portion of equity, not the entirety. PYRAMIDING is a key empowerment to portfolio growth, turning that 1 into 2 without any additional capitol investment by self because "Uncle Sam" will allow you to use $ owned to them (1031). 

    - Next, MARKET REALLOCATION: As anyone who's done stocks for some time will know, what was a good position years ago may or may not be of equal value going forward. And very rarely does a market hold it's position measured over decades as there is a natural cycle of growth, maturity, decline, redevelopment, growth, maturity, decline, redev...... 

    - OPPORTUNITY COST: The 1 constant in life is CHANGE. Politics change, economics change, society changes, and with all of this opportunities change. Today there stands a general consensus of many stacking up "dry powder" in preparation for what's anticipated as a "good season" for MFH acquisitions, presented by a unique culmination of factors. For some, selling existing positions that themselves are just a-ok fine could make a lot of sense because of the Opportunities otherwise presented in the market of the moment. 

    - CAP-X: While Real Estate is an appreciating asset, it is also a diminishing one. Components wear down and out. Roofs, windows, doors, flooring, appliances etc., these things have use spans and as time passes the expenses come home to roost. What was a "good performer" for the past 7yrs may be a "net looser" for the next 7 given those expenses occurring and being realized. And the math of that property as a held asset going forward, given that new capitol investment, may not make sense as it had prior. 

  • Investor · Akron, OH · Member since 2016 · 2k+ posts · 4k+ votes
    1y

    I have found that I too am also in a place in 3-7 years where I would meet the @Joe Villeneuve criteria to sell. It took me a while but I do finally understand why that makes sense. But I have questions I'm hoping you'll entertain.

    I have a group of properties that I've held for five years and my low interest rate is resetting this month and I'm planning to do a cash out refi prior to a sale for a couple of reasons:

    1) Its easier to get a deal under contract if you don't have to make it contingent on a sale or if you don't want to risk paying capital gains on the sale if you can't find something suitable to buy. In this case I've found a 20 unit to buy and I wont be able to do the deal if I try to sell first.

    2) I want to invest in a new company with different ownership with part of the money from the refi/sale property and if I sell straight out I can't do that without paying capital gains. So I am planning to take out as much as I can with a refi and then I'll sell in 9-12 months when the new property is stable to get out the remaining equity.  The plan is to trade my appreciated, nicely renovated one bedroom properties up to newer (still value add) two bedrooms in a better neighborhood with higher rent potential (in the original company)

    3) Because we renovate well, the appreciated, renovated properties that I have to sell are going to have lower maintenance costs than anything that I can buy so a split refi/sale with two purchases buys me time to stabilize in renovated in chunks.

    Do you think this is a reasonable thing to do in this case or do you think this is a bad idea (and why)? Also, where do you find these 20% DP loans? I always ask and sometimes the banks say yes but usually the small banks that will lend to us want to do 25% down with 20 year amortization. I've looked into the Freddie/Fannie multi-fam financing but with a 20 unit deal I'm just on the boder of qualifying on loan size and cash reserves.

    Right now I've held my longest tenure properties for 8 years and I'd like to sell but I really would like to first have something else to buy plus I still have two years with more favorable interest rates than I can get right now. Do you recommend selling and just risking the capital gain tax if I can't find something good to buy?

  • Investor · Milwaukee - Mequon, WI · Member since 2010 · 5k+ posts · 7k+ votes
    1y

    You have to compare numbers, capital gains is substantial after 8 years. I would sit down with a cup of coffee and whip up an XLS to get a sense for the implications of the scenarios you are considering.

    It is possible to do a 1031 and line up a new investment first. Get it under contract with a longer (90 day?) closing time line or enter an option to purchase agreement which can easily run for a year.

    But 20 year amortization is very short. Sounds like these are portfolio loans, so the bank is at liberty to negotiate these terms with you. 30 or 25 is more common. Upside is that you are paying off debt a lot faster with more towards principal and less towards interest. 

    20% down is only for SF, even a duplex will require 25% down unless owner-occupied.

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.