Developer · Garland, TX · Member since 2008 · 8k+ posts · 4k+ votes
Bill Gulley posted in another thread that he'd rather have "5 150K properties than 20 32K properties, all things considered. Generally, less maintenance, less management efforts, fewer collection problems, less vacancy and better appriciation."
I think this is an intriguing choice. Let's flesh it out a bit and hear your opinions.
Added assumptions:
5 $150k homes that rent for $1600 on average in nice parts of town in mid-America. Homes are owned with no debt. Expenses run 45% of income. You self manage, spending about 100 hours a year of your time. NOI is $52,800.
Or
20 $32K homes that rent for $700 each in not so nice parts of the same city. Expenses run 55% of scheduled income because you have higher vacancy, turnover, and make ready expenses. You self manage, spending 400 hours per year of your time. NOI is $75,600.
Certainly,other assumptions would need to be made, but which portfolio do you like and why? Assume you will hold for the long term.
Investor · Cincinnati, OH · Member since 2010 · 1k+ posts · 928 votes
13y
Well, in my market, and most metro areas of the midwest, you can certainly get 2%+ a month easily on the $30-35K houses, so I think that's realistic. I'm actually more skeptical of the $150K house that rents for $1,600. Rent yields drop precipitously as prices go over $100K in most places.
Also, regarding expense assumptions on the expensive homes: taxes and insurance will be a much higher percentage of gross rent, so I think this essentially offsets the other issues. Lower end tenants can also be stickier, as they are perennial renters, versus the higher end folks who are likely transitioning to ownership (admittedly, all the middle class folks with short-sale stains on their credit may keep them as renters for longer periods -- so we should like to rent to short-salers?).
As far as maintenance, it should be assumed that the cheaper properties have been updated, are either brick or vinyl/alum clad. A 10 yr old house will have aging roof and mechanicals, so it presents its own issues. Lower end tenants are less demanding, and the home finishes can focus purely on durability, with few amenities.
I know you said self-manage, but many PMs give discounts based on unit volume, so greater units might trigger lower average PM rates.
As far as diversification, there is a sweet spot for how many you own, and it's more than 5 (but less than 20). For stocks, I've seen studies that indicate optimal diversification at around 15-20 companies. One vacancy in your large portfolio of inexpensive homes hardly makes a dent.
A large benefit to the expensive homes relates to financing advantages. You could use your allotted 10 Fannie Mae 30-yr loans to build this portfolio, but could not do so on the more numerous and cheaper houses. Loan closing costs are much more efficient across just 5 loans as well.
Personally, I think the inexpensive homes have the most room to rebound in price over time. Prices on these collapsed the most, as many in the midwest are buying REOs at 25-30% of 2006 prices. The rent/buy ratio is so absurdly skewed, that just some minor mean reversion will generate significant capital appreciation. The $150K houses in the midwest did not fall in price any where near that degree.
Developer · Garland, TX · Member since 2008 · 8k+ posts · 4k+ votes
13y
I was thinking further up into the rust belt than your neighborhood, Bill. Maybe the $32k homes are section 8 rentals in Ohio or Michigan. They are actually doable in the Dallas area, too.
I didn't include financing in the deal because that can complicate it, so keep in mind, if you want to borrow against these properties, you'll have an easier time with the nice homes. At lower rates and better terms.
Rental Property Investor · Phoenix/Lima, Arizona/OH · Member since 2012 · 4k+ posts · 4k+ votes
13y
Nice to see Jon Klaus jump into this discussion. Three things to keep in mind when making this choice:
1. Diversification of Income
2. Ease of management
3. Potential for Appreciation
On the surface, more revenue streams and higher CF may seem like a winner, and for some it is. However, how many people drop out of REI because of being burned out on management every day of the week? How many never get in due to fears of management? LOTS – and this is a function of the property! So, is it better to have 52k but enjoy the process and be able to last long term, or 75k but get burned out?
When I started, a seasoned landlord told me that there is no faster way to become disillusioned in humanity than being a landlord – he had a ton of Junkers. This has not been my experience.
I think we have to own assets that will lend to us lasting in the business. And why is it important to last long-term? Appreciation. We get paid while we wait, but ultimately we need to ensure that the property we hold keeps up and hopefully outpaces inflation so that it can either be sold for capital gains or leveraged to buy more property and repeat the cycle. Appreciation, however, is function of desirability. If people do not want what you have, it will not appreciate. And if we can not stick around long enough to allow the cycle to work, we lose as well
So, in my calculus of the investment cycle, I would gladly give up some cash flow today for the benefits of “personal sanity” and appreciation, both of which are key to my long-term strategy. Besides, 52k in this example is very substantial cash flow at the end of the day.
Investor · Cincinnati, OH · Member since 2010 · 1k+ posts · 928 votes
13y
Well, in my market, and most metro areas of the midwest, you can certainly get 2%+ a month easily on the $30-35K houses, so I think that's realistic. I'm actually more skeptical of the $150K house that rents for $1,600. Rent yields drop precipitously as prices go over $100K in most places.
Also, regarding expense assumptions on the expensive homes: taxes and insurance will be a much higher percentage of gross rent, so I think this essentially offsets the other issues. Lower end tenants can also be stickier, as they are perennial renters, versus the higher end folks who are likely transitioning to ownership (admittedly, all the middle class folks with short-sale stains on their credit may keep them as renters for longer periods -- so we should like to rent to short-salers?).
As far as maintenance, it should be assumed that the cheaper properties have been updated, are either brick or vinyl/alum clad. A 10 yr old house will have aging roof and mechanicals, so it presents its own issues. Lower end tenants are less demanding, and the home finishes can focus purely on durability, with few amenities.
I know you said self-manage, but many PMs give discounts based on unit volume, so greater units might trigger lower average PM rates.
As far as diversification, there is a sweet spot for how many you own, and it's more than 5 (but less than 20). For stocks, I've seen studies that indicate optimal diversification at around 15-20 companies. One vacancy in your large portfolio of inexpensive homes hardly makes a dent.
A large benefit to the expensive homes relates to financing advantages. You could use your allotted 10 Fannie Mae 30-yr loans to build this portfolio, but could not do so on the more numerous and cheaper houses. Loan closing costs are much more efficient across just 5 loans as well.
Personally, I think the inexpensive homes have the most room to rebound in price over time. Prices on these collapsed the most, as many in the midwest are buying REOs at 25-30% of 2006 prices. The rent/buy ratio is so absurdly skewed, that just some minor mean reversion will generate significant capital appreciation. The $150K houses in the midwest did not fall in price any where near that degree.
Investor · Rancho Cucamonga, CA · Member since 2008 · 1k+ posts · 684 votes
13y
My goal would is to shift towards the second option.
I believe the time involved is a bit different.
Self managing 20 - 32k houses I was okay with at 400 hours/year.
Self managing 5 - 150k houses, I think would be more like 40 hours/year if you set things up right.
But we all have to start somewhere and it's usually easier to scale the business and deploy expensive debt around high cash-flow 32k houses versus class A 150k houses.
Realtor · Houston, TX · Member since 2011 · 916 posts · 296 votes
13y
Using the numbers you provided, I would go with the 20 houses. The reason is because I'm young and fairly new to real estate so I have plenty of time. That extra profit can be applied to higher priced houses if I become a burned out landlord.
Developer · Garland, TX · Member since 2008 · 8k+ posts · 4k+ votes
13y
This is a good point, Steve. Many start with entry level SFRs because that is what they can afford starting out. Then at some point they have the option of moving upscale or continuing to scale with the lower end rentals.
Real Estate Broker · Canton, GA · Member since 2010 · 15k+ posts · 11k+ votes
13y
No way I would take on 20 houses for 32k. The economies of scale even if they are close by and dealing with 20 roofs etc. is not appealing to me.
This all goes back to what you see value in.
I heavily value my time. I make the most ROI closing out commercial deals for clients. Everything I have put up against it isn't even in the same Universe for returns. I think the expenses are more like 60% and the hours estimated will be more if you self-manage.
I would not want to put in 500 hours or more of time in a year for NOI of around 50k to 60k.
There are people in this world who have a bunch of money or time on their hands. If you have a bunch of money typically what you look for is something that is NOT A JOB but will give you the most yield for the safest return. So I do not want anything that engulfs me or takes most of me to keep it going.
If someone has 750k cash they can simply go into an apartment building where the size dictates structure for management and a repair person so they stay hands off with the investment.
Also can do something in commercial or triple net. Rent bumps are not as strong but you also have all expenses paid by the corporate tenant so that 2 to 3% per year bump is not offset by growing expenses and maintenance costs.
Water goes up, taxes skyrocket, land or building has issues the corporate tenant eats all the costs and you still get a passive return.
I do agree that for people with limited funds houses are a starting point because they have more time than anything else.
The clients I deal with typically have a few hundred k to into the millions and they do not want intensive job or headache type investments. Now if someone owned say an apartment, triple net, and then wanted to allocate some part of the portfolio for houses then that could work. I have seen some investors I know who have houses everywhere and they pay a person a salary to just handle everything for them. They do not want a property manager with divided interest servicing many clients so they pay for a full time person so they can be hands off with their investments. Of course you check in periodically to keep them on point.
I think the 32k house comes down to what is important for the investor. If they have a bunch of cash and a great job then maybe the houses in a nicer area for equity down the road is more important. If they want to quit their job and grow the money the fastest possible than yield might be the most important regardless of the area or how intensive it is. If tax write off structure is most important than cash flow or appreciation isn't the factor as much as how much they can write off existing losses or the amount they can write down in the future.
So I think what type of investor you are talking too will determine many, many different answers on this question.
Investor · Cincinnati, OH · Member since 2010 · 1k+ posts · 928 votes
13y
Why not assume that competent property management is used in both cases, versus self managing? I won't self manage, period. I have many homes and multi's in this demographic (500-900 monthly rents), and weeks go by without hearing anything from my PM, and things generally run like a top. I download data from their system weekly that I automatically use to generate a host of reports that give me a detailed P&L, ROI numbers, physical/economic vacancy rates, time to fill vacancies, average duration of tenancies, etc. I call only as I have issues. The cost of the PM is money well spent.
On the lower end homes, it only takes a tenant making $12/hr to make the rent, or a couple making minimum wage. So the income level is easy to replace and sustain. If the tenant seems to be having trouble, I tell my PM to instruct them to zero out their withholding at work. They're all eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit. They don't pay taxes, they get money back in February, oftentimes many thousands, it's like the annual lottery for them. They barely scrape by all year, and then, BONANZA! But most of them still have money coming out of their paychecks, ridiculous. Well, where did that tangent come from?
Joel Owens, I knew you'd weigh in pitching commercial NNN for that $750K!! Always good to hear the commercial perspective.
Rental Property Investor · Phoenix/Lima, Arizona/OH · Member since 2012 · 4k+ posts · 4k+ votes
13y
Guys, I am not sure where the notion of 500 hours/year management time commitment for 20 rentals comes from. I’ve owned 18 for 2 years and closing on 10 more in a week. My average time commitment is at most 10 hours/month – that’s a high estimate!
Investor · Southeast, MI · Member since 2012 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
13y
This is a great thread. The only issue that I have is with some of the math. Five houses at $150K would be a total investment of $750,000. That same $750,000 to purchase houses at $32K each would be 23.43 houses. We could round down to 23 houses to make it close. At the numbers given, those 23 houses would net $86,940. (23 x $700 rent x 12 months x 45% = 86,940) This is a bigger number than was originally given.
In my area, a $150,000 house will have trouble renting for $1,600 and a $32,000 house will rent in the $850-900 range. This would also change the net result. I know that all markets have different numbers.
I totally agree that the more expensive houses will be less management intensive, but I'm not sure there would be such a big difference in the net results. My expenses in 2012 were 36.6% of rents.
Having said all of this, I think that the cheaper houses are a great (and likely only) way to get into the business. Down the road, I would like to move up to nicer houses that are less management intensive, even though the profits will be less. I think a lot of this depends on age also. I started buying houses at 21 and had no problem dealing with all the drama. When I'm 50, I probably won't want to deal with as much and will be focused on the better areas.
Real Estate Broker · Canton, GA · Member since 2010 · 15k+ posts · 11k+ votes
13y
I believe Jon Klaus had a scenario of self- managing and doing everything with repairs etc.
If we are talking having a structure in place that you build in from the beginning with management a full time repair person etc. with your purchase price then that is a different scenario.
I find many investors overpay and do not out in the correct structure. Then they are forced to deal with doing repairs themselves, evictions themselves, leasing themselves to meet debt service.
Experienced investors can point to not having those problems as they have a plan in place going in. Sadly a mass of the population of investors does not.
So if I am buying a 150 unit and I have calculated for a full time repair person,professional management company, and do not have extensive mitigated CAPEX going in, and I have records for the last 3 years showing stability then YES involvement can be minimal with the right team in place.
A Walgreens and an apartment are totally different animals.
Walgreens -BBB investment grade credit or better.
*25 year primary lease on most
*New product sells for about a 5.25% to 6.5% cap depending on desirability of location (rural, suburban, urban) If you have to obtain financing the DCSR is usually 1.01 and the finance is about 10 to 15% down. You will cash flow a little but not much at all. Equity build up through principal pay down and tax write off are the main drivers. Works well for 1031 and 1033 exchanges.
*No rent bumps in primary term (first 25 years. Investors often do not hold pharmacies for the full primary term unless for a retirement strategy. Usually it's for a safe place to put money for awhile when they shift around other assets.
* You can get value add deals at a 9 or 10 cap with only say 5 or 10 years left in the primary lease. The downside is the equity required to assume the loan or pay all cash a few million or more for the property. Most pharmacies renew but it is hard to get a loan on them with just a few years left in primary. The lenders do not want to be left with high debt balance owing and the remote chance the pharmacy does not renew and moves locations. Happens less than 10% of the time but can happen. So there are value plays out there versus new builds for full primary term but they require serious cash to play.
*Typically cannot get creative with the deal structure. You either assume the loan or get a new loan or pay cash. Sometimes you have to assume the loan as there are pre-pay penalties built in that are hefty. Self liquidating loans that run with the primary term of the lease are preferred for assumable loans. If you have a property that must be assumed and say the loan only goes 5 more years but the primary lease goes 10 more years you have a problem. Since there are no rent bumps until the options to renew kick in you will have issues when the assumed loan comes due.
You have to either sell off, pay off the remaining balance, or refi. If interest rates have risen but the rent is locked in the primary you are now in a negative cash flow situation.
*Loans are typically non-recourse except for "bad boy" clauses. Example you file BK or take payments and do not pay the lender. Some lenders will require administrators on the loans and the payments go directly to the lender from the corp. company.
Rent bumps in the primary term are not on pharmacies but more on restaurants, banks, dollar stores, Auto Stores, GSA's etc.
Apartment building
*can get creative with structuring to leverage cash
*not a passive only investment
*economies of scale with one location
*control the look and feel of the whole development (investment) without depending on other investors to keep their end of the deal with their properties that are close by.
*financing with 5 plus units you typically can't get more than 10 year term so will have to mitigate refi versus pay down or sell exits.
*annual rent bumps are typically stronger than triple net
* expenses and increases in utility and repairs can be estimated but cannot be totally controlled (returns are not guaranteed or fixed).
Example in the lease structure of a pharmacy if the building was hit and leveled by a Meteor the tenant would have to rebuild and still keep paying the rent without missing a beat.
This example above is not even close to a full comparison between the two but just something I threw together quickly.
Investor · Cincinnati, OH · Member since 2010 · 1k+ posts · 928 votes
13y
Originally posted by Jon Klaus:
David B, how much time do you think it would take to manage 20 of these?
I'm somewhat removed, Jon, since I use a PM, but I do know that almost all of my PM's portfolio of 300 units falls in this low-moderate rent range demographic. They have four people, not all full-time, working on it. I calculate they spend .4 hours / week per property to manage them (PM, leasing agent, bookkeeper, and admin are involved). This actually is right on your 400 hours/year estimate, or 8 hours per week for the 20-property portfolio. I'm sure that well-organized self-managers could do it for less.
The way most PMs bill clearly favors the inexpensive properties.
Investor · Cincinnati, OH · Member since 2010 · 1k+ posts · 928 votes
13y
Originally posted by Ben Leybovich:
I’ve owned 18 for 2 years and closing on 10 more in a week. My average time commitment is at most 10 hours/month – that’s a high estimate!
You must be a time-efficiency expert, Ben, great job! I do wonder if that's a long enough period to see the full cycle of tenant turnover across all those units. Tenant placement is of course a huge time eater.
I'd like to hear how many total hours a good self-manager spends on turnover, including: move-out inspection, utility switchovers, coordinating handymen, placing ads and signage, taking phone calls, screening tenants online, calling former landlords, calling employers, showing unit, casing out their current residence?, move-in walkthrough... I get tired just thinking about it. Be realistic!! How many hours, self-managers, for the lower blue-collar unit, as well as the more middle-class unit?
Rental Property Investor · Phoenix/Lima, Arizona/OH · Member since 2012 · 4k+ posts · 4k+ votes
13y
David Beard Over the past 7 years, my average vacancy rate is well under 5%. Strange things happen at times, but this is the average. The reason I don’t spend much time on management is because that is all I do - manage. I do not do any of the repairs myself. I have developed long-standing relationships with contractors and handy people, whom I pay well I might add, which removes me from the property for most of the turnover.
For example, I’ve just gotten the keys to one of my units yesterday. I walked through with my handyman – 30 minutes. I gave him a $100 prepaid card to Lowes for any of the odds and ends that he may need and he has been at the unit starting today. He knows my paint scheme, which caulk to use, which kind of roller to use on doors vs. cabinets vs. walls, and all the rest of it because we’ve been together for a while. By Tuesday, Wednesday at the latest, the apartment will be ready for the floor cleaning and touch-up. My handyman will likely be the one to let the carpet cleaners in.
My time commitment on this turnover thus far – 45 minutes (15 to say good buy to the outgoing tenant and 30 to establish a plan for my worker)
There are 2 caveats here:
1. The apartment was left in rather good condition, which is a function of the type of tenants that this unit, in this building, in this location is able to attract (a subject discussed extensively in several threads today)
2. I have guys that I am able to hand the keys to and not worry. It took time to develop those kinds of relationships but this is where I am today.
In all fairness, I am spending much more time over the last 4-6 weeks than is the norm, but only because I am in the middle of an acquisition.
A final thought. This did not happen on accident. There are two reasons why being an ever-present but “hands-off” manager is a priority to me. First, as many units as it will take to get me to where I am going, there is no chance that I can spend my time doing anything other than what I am doing. But more importantly, you may have picked up in other threads that I have MS, which is a medical condition that will likely make it very difficult or impossible for me to perform manual labor over time. Thus, from the very beginning RE has been about Passive CF. I don’t mind working with my brains, but working with my muscles is dangerous for me since I can not be sure how long I will have full control of my physiology. Incidentally, I advise that everyone builds systems that remove the manager from having to perform physical labor.
Investor · Cincinnati, OH · Member since 2010 · 1k+ posts · 928 votes
13y
@Ben Leybovich - thanks, Ben, I am 110% with you on leveraging mental effort in this game. I did not know of your condition previously, but certainly wish you the very best. I have ready many of your posts, and thought everyone was terrific and "value-add", as they say. The silver lining that you speak of is that you have all the greater motivation to "think harder" about how to build a successful RE business that minimizes the time you spend on physical (often mundane) tasks, kudos to you for that. These tasks do not usually represent an appropriate return on the time we spend. You are obviously earning a very "high wage" from managing your properties in the efficient manner that you do.
I have used a PM exclusively, as I noted. I spent a great deal of time doing due diligence on the front end, and spent a lot of time being sure I could extract the data from their systems (PM system and Quickbooks) to enable me to keep my fingers on the pulse, and that I agreed with their tenant screening, marketing approach, etc.
All that said, I am genuinely interested in how many hours it takes to do a complete turn. You discussed only the make-ready of the unit, I'm interested in the entire process until the new tenant is happily at home in your unit. And that counts all the driving time back and forth to the unit and and wherever else, "fully loaded", as they say, no sandbagging! :)
You mention a 5% vacancy rate. That translates to a bit shorter than 2 years for average tenancy, assuming one down-month between tenants. With 18 units, this means you have 9-10 units a year turning over.
What about you as well, Rob K and Jon Klaus? How many hours, "fully loaded" including all drive time, to complete a turn and get the new tenant moved in? I reference you guys since I know you posted earlier and have a lot of landlording experience.
Commercial Landlord · Oshkosh, WI · Member since 2013 · 299 posts · 88 votes
13y
The exercise is probably not a good one because it fails to take a few things in consideration. The variables that your deciding as an investor to just ignore buying apt buildings or commercial triple net or anything in between junker houses and brand new construction.
Usually in an investors career they see some great value in some thing they take a chance on, a great spread to buy. Most dont just sift though junker houses or brand new construction.
For the sake of saying this though it seems crazy to want to hold for long lengths of time a portfolio of 23 roofs when one apt building would be a lot easier then a scattered site plan? No? Ok of course you can sell off homes at a time to get your hands on cash when you need it if you buy 23 homes but.... How liquid are junker houses? These junkers under 50k are not that easy to get your buyers financed into. For good reason because generally speaking the location is poor and there functional obsolescence is risk banks and underwriting dont want.
On the flip side most people starting out have a lot easier time doing a 32k home then a 150k home so this alone is a big reason why people start here and for decades some never leave this sector.
I knew about 6 years into my investing career I needed to make a change because I didnt want to wake up at age 50 with 75 junker houses and headaches. I was more hoping to wake up with an 50 unit complex paid for an maybe 1/2 dozen homes and duplexes and a 3 or 4.. 4 unit buildings instead. The diversity in a portfolio like this helps me in the aspect if I needed 10k cash so I could buy x or go on vacation or just put a son through college ect I could sell off a junker. If I wanted cash flow my large apt building provided that.
At age 29 I bought into a 74 unit complex and it was the best thing I ever did in this business. Im 44 now and I made a lot of bone head mistakes my 1st 10 years in this business but looking back, I probably would have taken more of these junker homes and sold them pooled cash to buy more large apt buildings if I could change things a bit.
I dont regret what I have done its still worked out and far exceeded what I might have been able to accomplish working a job over the years. My vote is for the 32k junkers but I add in there to move this into larger apt building as you get 4 to 6 junker homes to trade up.
Im going to buy into another complex here soon after I finish with this next group of junker homes I plan to sell off and pool cash again.
My larger complex I have managers handle so its hands off but I do rehabs to keep me busy growing my investment cash base as I work to generate money for my next complex I will buy.
The biggest problem I have had using this formula over the years is its difficult to formulate strategics using business cycle since apts run opposite to homes when it comes to boom bust cycle. I had to actually reduce my rehab on smaller homes during bust cycles so I am not stuck with them or rent them with plan to sell them later. Instead I often use the bust cycle to build cash. Im half way at age 44 so with a horizon of say 35 years + to invest, I believe in larger is better since Im closer to retirement and I look for larger assets like 4 to 8 unit and up things that start at 70k and go to 200k as a smaller project. I do think at least having 7 or 8 buildings is a good idea even if its 7 complexes to spread around your risk. Right now I am a little out of balance with my 74 unit but its ok since Im always acquiring more.
Rental Property Investor · Phoenix/Lima, Arizona/OH · Member since 2012 · 4k+ posts · 4k+ votes
13y
David BeardActually, my turn over is 3 units per year and I count on a 2-month turn-over period. So my vacancy runs on the average 2-3%.
Yes, there will be a few (20 on the average) telephone inquiries and up to 5 showings usually before the unit is rented. At the momenet I field most of both, and to be completely honest I don't mind flappping my lips. It does not make the income any less passive in my mind. It certainly beats punching the clock. But, in about a week I'll be gaining 10 more units, and I can see the day now when someone else will be doing the showings. This person will need some serious training from me...
Incidentally, my wife and I just came from Cinci last night. We enjoyed a stay at the Symphony Hotel and the Cincinnati Symphony concert with Gil Shaham – we are both classically trained musicians by trade. Loved it - lots of memories. We met at the conservatory and have deep roots in the city. What opportunities are you seeing in Cinci David?
Developer · Garland, TX · Member since 2008 · 8k+ posts · 4k+ votes
13y
About 8-14 hours. I place ads, place signs, take calls, texts, emails, and email out apps. I visit the homes with my handyman to spec make ready. If make ready is substantial, I'll visit a couple times during make ready. My units are spread out so I put lock boxes on them and let prospects that I've prequalified show themselves. I process the apps, and usually take deposits at my office. I don't get a lot of apps, because I disqualify many on the phone. Or they disqualify themselves. I walk through, sign lease, take payment, and hand over keys at the unit.
My turnover in the lower end homes is about once a year. Higher end is every two years. I often ask slightly higher than market rents which does add time to the process as it takes more time/candidates to rent.
Developer · Garland, TX · Member since 2008 · 8k+ posts · 4k+ votes
13y
Yes, William, it makes sense to adjust strategy over time as you become better capitalized and move toward passive investing. The main question here is lower end homes or higher end homes? Sounds like you'd vote for more lower end doors, packaged for efficiency?
