Unpacking the Rent Crisis: It's Not Just Greedy Landlords..
Michael CalveyPro Member
Head of Sales at BiggerPockets · Denver, CO · Member since 2023 · 124 posts · 154 votesUnpacking the Rent Crisis: It's Not Just Greedy Landlords..
Most Popular Reply
Dan H.Pro Member
Investor · Poway, CA · Member since 2015 · 7k+ posts · 8k+ votesI find it interesting that virtually every business in America is expected to maximize profits to the level possible in a free economy but a landlord (LL) that does the same is a “Predatory landlord”. Every business should strive to maximize profits in a free economy, but for some reason some people think this should not be the case for a LL.
Just over a year ago my umbrella insurance provider indicated they were no longer covering vehicles. They were reducing the premium slightly for this loss of coverage. It is important that my umbrella policy cover vehicles for reasons that are not important. I spent a significant portion of the next 2 days looking for umbrella insurance. Most umbrella insurance providers either did not cover vehicles in CA, did not cover structures in CA, or required that I had all vehicles and properties insured with them to provide an umbrella policy. I had very few choices. My umbrella insurance almost doubled over night.
The article mentions nothing about risk.
In the time frame that is covered by the article my market had the most stringent eviction moratorium in the country. You could only evict for health and safety issues. A tenant could stop paying and break every lease term not related to health and safety and you could not evict. I have not seen any statistic on what percentage of the tenants that did not pay during this eviction moratorium ended up paying the back rent but believe it is a very small percentage (unbeliever <5%). This in effect means LLs paid for the housing of these tenants by law without getting compensated. this newly identified risk mandates increased revenue (rent increases) to compensate for the increased risk of the government allowing tenant to not pay rent and damage unit with no legal means to get rid of the tenant.
Just prior to the period in the article, CA passed statewide rent control on MF (starting at 2 unit) properties. This took away the LL capability to not renew lease or, my preferred method, provide large rent increase above market to get rid of less than ideal tenants. Now LL are stuck with these less than ideal tenants. This raises risk and increases effort required which is to be reflected in rent increases. In addition, our rent increase is capped such that a crazy inflation period could exceed max allowed rent increase which again is a risk. This increased risk is the primary reason after rent control is started, the rent increases are maximum allowed for a few (minimum) years after rent control goes into affect. The rent control advocates, having zero understanding of economics, blames greedy landlords without realizing the rent control has increased risks.
My properties are in a very desirable area that is very constrained. In a free market the rents would reflect the scarcity of a great product but the government tries to meddle in the free market which at least in the short term increases the scarcity.
Best wishes
54 Replies
- Member since 2022 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes2y
Quote from @Dan H.:
I find it interesting that virtually every business in America is expected to maximize profits to the level possible in a free economy but a landlord (LL) that does the same is a “Predatory landlord”. Every business should strive to maximize profits in a free economy, but for some reason some people think this should not be the case for a LL.
Just over a year ago my umbrella insurance provider indicated they were no longer covering vehicles. They were reducing the premium slightly for this loss of coverage. It is important that my umbrella policy cover vehicles for reasons that are not important. I spent a significant portion of the next 2 days looking for umbrella insurance. Most umbrella insurance providers either did not cover vehicles in CA, did not cover structures in CA, or required that I had all vehicles and properties insured with them to provide an umbrella policy. I had very few choices. My umbrella insurance almost doubled over night.
The article mentions nothing about risk.In the time frame that is covered by the article my market had the most stringent eviction moratorium in the country. You could only evict for health and safety issues. A tenant could stop paying and break every lease term not related to health and safety and you could not evict. I have not seen any statistic on what percentage of the tenants that did not pay during this eviction moratorium ended up paying the back rent but believe it is a very small percentage (unbeliever <5%). This in effect means LLs paid for the housing of these tenants by law without getting compensated. this newly identified risk mandates increased revenue (rent increases) to compensate for the increased risk of the government allowing tenant to not pay rent and damage unit with no legal means to get rid of the tenant.
Just prior to the period in the article, CA passed statewide rent control on MF (starting at 2 unit) properties. This took away the LL capability to not renew lease or, my preferred method, provide large rent increase above market to get rid of less than ideal tenants. Now LL are stuck with these less than ideal tenants. This raises risk and increases effort required which is to be reflected in rent increases. In addition, our rent increase is capped such that a crazy inflation period could exceed max allowed rent increase which again is a risk. This increased risk is the primary reason after rent control is started, the rent increases are maximum allowed for a few (minimum) years after rent control goes into affect. The rent control advocates, having zero understanding of economics, blames greedy landlords without realizing the rent control has increased risks.
My properties are in a very desirable area that is very constrained. In a free market the rents would reflect the scarcity of a great product but the government tries to meddle in the free market which at least in the short term increases the scarcity.
Best wishes
I think you nailed it. Risk! At least on the west coast. Remove the draconian anti-landlord legislation and I think you could see a return of many landlords and SFR's in particular. 11000 landlords quit Seattle in 2022, this is the number that has not renewed their rental registration. More to come too. the inexperienced will more slowly figure this out. There is some talk of rolling back some legislation, but I doubt I'll see it in my lifetime, and it won't be good enough for me. Section 8 is the new frontier, so downgrade, feather out the risk, and adjust accordingly.
- Head of Sales at BiggerPockets · Denver, CO · Member since 2023 · 124 posts · 154 votes2y@James Hamling I appreciate you bringing this up. It's an important distinction to make.
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Michael Calvey:
@Joshua Mumford Wow. This is frustrating. "Tricon Residential, iincreased its fee revenue by 42% since the pandemic." Its a bit predatory to me.
Huh, ya don't say.... So what would you call the assorted actions BP has done to increase revenues as of recent? "Bad for thee but not for me" kind of thing?.......
You're right that passing on legitimate increased costs to customers is a normal business practice. One which I fully support.
The article highlights how rising expenses for landlords are contributing to rent increases, not just profit-seeking.
However, it seems like what Joshua mentioned regarding, AMH & Tricon, is simply about adding fees that offer no value in order increase profits.But, I want to address your comparison to BiggerPockets.
Our situation is quite different from the large rental companies mentioned.
At BiggerPockets, we've actually worked hard to keep our core membership costs stable while significantly increasing the value we provide. Our Pro Membership has remained at $39/month, even as we've added tons of new features and content.We've invested heavily in tools like the Market Finder and Deal Finder, partnered to offer free RentRedi subscriptions, and expanded our podcast lineup with shows like The Money Show, The Rookie Real Estate Show, and On The Market presented by Fundrise.
All of this is aimed at providing more value to our members without hiking prices.While I understand your perspective, I don't think it's accurate to compare our approach to the fee increases mentioned in the article. We haven't raised membership costs, and we're constantly adding new features that bring more value to our audience. If we ever need to adjust pricing in the future, it will be to support continued improvements and expanded offerings for our members.
Our goal is focused on delivering more value to our community. :)
- 2yDan H.Pro MemberInvestor · Poway, CA · Member since 2015 · 7k+ posts · 8k+ votes
Quote from @Michael Calvey:
@James Hamling I appreciate you bringing this up. It's an important distinction to make.Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Michael Calvey:
@Joshua Mumford Wow. This is frustrating. "Tricon Residential, iincreased its fee revenue by 42% since the pandemic." Its a bit predatory to me.
Huh, ya don't say.... So what would you call the assorted actions BP has done to increase revenues as of recent? "Bad for thee but not for me" kind of thing?.......
You're right that passing on legitimate increased costs to customers is a normal business practice. One which I fully support.
The article highlights how rising expenses for landlords are contributing to rent increases, not just profit-seeking.
However, it seems like what Joshua mentioned regarding, AMH & Tricon, is simply about adding fees that offer no value in order increase profits.But, I want to address your comparison to BiggerPockets.
Our situation is quite different from the large rental companies mentioned.
At BiggerPockets, we've actually worked hard to keep our core membership costs stable while significantly increasing the value we provide. Our Pro Membership has remained at $39/month, even as we've added tons of new features and content.We've invested heavily in tools like the Market Finder and Deal Finder, partnered to offer free RentRedi subscriptions, and expanded our podcast lineup with shows like The Money Show, The Rookie Real Estate Show, and On The Market presented by Fundrise.
All of this is aimed at providing more value to our members without hiking prices.While I understand your perspective, I don't think it's accurate to compare our approach to the fee increases mentioned in the article. We haven't raised membership costs, and we're constantly adding new features that bring more value to our audience. If we ever need to adjust pricing in the future, it will be to support continued improvements and expanded offerings for our members.
Our goal is focused on delivering more value to our community. :)
BP’s goal, like virtually all businesses, is to maximize profit. BP in not a non profit. Profit can be achieved by volume and/or price. The features added ideally increases membership to justify the costs.
How come foreclosure access is additional cost on BP? How is this different than other business’ add on costs?
I like BP so my comments are not intended as an attack, but for you to imply these additional features were added without expected profit is disingenuous. They were added because they are expected to increase membership and at some point maybe justify a price increase. Nothing is wrong with this, but it should be owned.
The reason AMH & Tricon fees are unacceptable is a mindset that looks less favorable on profit from residential housing than virtually any other business. BP should not succumb to these beliefs. It should encourage a free economy with respect to residential housing recognizing that large profits would encourage competition/development.
However the profits are not large. I have seen 3 studies recently comparing home ownership compared to renting. 1) 50 out of 50 largest markets it is initially cheaper to rent than own 2) 97 out of 100 largest markets it is initially cheaper to rent than own 3) 95 out of 100 largest markets it is initially cheaper to rent than own. Note owners do not have vacancy, tenant turn over, typically take better care of the unit than tenants so have reduced maintenance/cap ex compared to a LL, and in many markets owners have reduced property tax compared to non owner occupied. My point is the margins in residential RE is thin (negative at most high LTV purchases).
These thin margins do not encourage providing rental units.
- Rental Property Investor · Atlanta, GA · Member since 2016 · 60 posts · 53 votes2y
@V.G Jason Thanks for the recommendation. What do you mean by consolidation?
- Rental Property Investor · New Braunfels, TX · Member since 2022 · 408 posts · 408 votes2yIt takes me less than an hour to file the protests online, ZERO dollars. My realtor does the CMA's every year for free. So far this year I've lowered my property tax by $3,720 so my ROI is about $3,720 an hour... Last year I got $241,162 in lowered assessments.
Quote from @James Hamling:
Kudos to you for putting in the effort, but I gotta ask, how much time and $ do you have invested in achieving these results?Quote from @Account Closed:
I don't know if it works in PA or Philly but I fight my taxes every year here in Texas and I usually get quite a bit knocked off. 9 appeals so far and we have lowered assessments by $243,940. I just use CMA's from my realtor to appeal. Still have 8 more pending results. I swear they just throw numbers out there and don't expect people to protest.Quote from @Saad D.:
I'm looking into some companies to help appeal property taxes, but not sure that will be worth the effort. Has anyone used a service in PA or Philly for that?
Curious how it comes out in ROI if viewed it that way. - 2yMichael DiossaPro MemberInvestor · RI · Member since 2023 · 191 posts · 163 votes
Quote from @Julie Garner:
Yep, the taxes. I realize it's not my right to tell people how to vote, but I'd like to put a clause in that reads, "Every time a levy, school tax increase, or special tax assessment passes, rent will increase by 5x the amount of that cost." Because you KNOW it's not the people paying the property taxes that are voting for this crap.
VERY TRUEE
- Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes2y
Quote from @Michael Calvey:
@James Hamling I appreciate you bringing this up. It's an important distinction to make.Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Michael Calvey:
@Joshua Mumford Wow. This is frustrating. "Tricon Residential, iincreased its fee revenue by 42% since the pandemic." Its a bit predatory to me.
Huh, ya don't say.... So what would you call the assorted actions BP has done to increase revenues as of recent? "Bad for thee but not for me" kind of thing?.......
You're right that passing on legitimate increased costs to customers is a normal business practice. One which I fully support.
The article highlights how rising expenses for landlords are contributing to rent increases, not just profit-seeking.
However, it seems like what Joshua mentioned regarding, AMH & Tricon, is simply about adding fees that offer no value in order increase profits.But, I want to address your comparison to BiggerPockets.
Our situation is quite different from the large rental companies mentioned.
At BiggerPockets, we've actually worked hard to keep our core membership costs stable while significantly increasing the value we provide. Our Pro Membership has remained at $39/month, even as we've added tons of new features and content.We've invested heavily in tools like the Market Finder and Deal Finder, partnered to offer free RentRedi subscriptions, and expanded our podcast lineup with shows like The Money Show, The Rookie Real Estate Show, and On The Market presented by Fundrise.
All of this is aimed at providing more value to our members without hiking prices.While I understand your perspective, I don't think it's accurate to compare our approach to the fee increases mentioned in the article. We haven't raised membership costs, and we're constantly adding new features that bring more value to our audience. If we ever need to adjust pricing in the future, it will be to support continued improvements and expanded offerings for our members.
Our goal is focused on delivering more value to our community. :)
You seem to be missing the applicability and similarities in BP and the corporate landlord.
When faced with rising expenses, and let's be fair, skyrocketing expense growth, right, a business has 3 choices;
(a) eat it and ride into bankruptcy.
(b) raise prices. And in this case of skyrocketing expenses, that means prices skyrocket.
(c) BIFERCATE expenses. This is common practice of discount airlines. Instead of spreading the "pain" on all, you look to different factors so can effect a smaller universal price increase, and start being more focused on the other price increases to be a burden upon those specific customers that it applies to, better known as a fee schedule.
You look at the fee schedule and declare it "evil". Ok, so would it be better to just make everyone universally pay? How about the added clarity in it, the added "fairness" in fact that the conveyance of expense is being focused onto those who incur such vs everyone.
And again, how that helps mitigate what the universal expense (rents) have to be raised upon everyone.
Now as for a corporation focusing on growing revenues and profits...... That is LITERALLY there legal requirement. So I don't know what you alternatively expect them to do, I assure every shareholder expects and demands this of them and if you were a shareholder I bet you would to.
So your vision of things, is via a lens you pre-selected to see things in, an "evil" intention vs one where they are trying to avoid the size a universal increase would require, the burden upon everyone, and seeking how to achieve same ends but in a more fair and balanced approach.
Or, more simply said, exactly what BP is doing......
- Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes2y
Quote from @Account Closed:
It takes me less than an hour to file the protests online, ZERO dollars. My realtor does the CMA's every year for free. So far this year I've lowered my property tax by $3,720 so my ROI is about $3,720 an hour... Last year I got $241,162 in lowered assessments.Quote from @James Hamling:
Kudos to you for putting in the effort, but I gotta ask, how much time and $ do you have invested in achieving these results?Quote from @Account Closed:
I don't know if it works in PA or Philly but I fight my taxes every year here in Texas and I usually get quite a bit knocked off. 9 appeals so far and we have lowered assessments by $243,940. I just use CMA's from my realtor to appeal. Still have 8 more pending results. I swear they just throw numbers out there and don't expect people to protest.Quote from @Saad D.:
I'm looking into some companies to help appeal property taxes, but not sure that will be worth the effort. Has anyone used a service in PA or Philly for that?
Curious how it comes out in ROI if viewed it that way.That's a good ROI.
The online feature is key, and rare in my experience.
Most places, it requires hours of actions and efforts, if not days. And with requirement of in-person actions.
If just a simple online things to say "nope, i don't agree, I want it cheaper", heck I think I'd almost have to do it on every one every time, lol. Sounds more like a discount lotto, lol.
- Member since 2020 · 351 posts · 329 votes2y
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Michael Calvey:
@James Hamling I appreciate you bringing this up. It's an important distinction to make.Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Michael Calvey:
@Joshua Mumford Wow. This is frustrating. "Tricon Residential, iincreased its fee revenue by 42% since the pandemic." Its a bit predatory to me.
Huh, ya don't say.... So what would you call the assorted actions BP has done to increase revenues as of recent? "Bad for thee but not for me" kind of thing?.......
You're right that passing on legitimate increased costs to customers is a normal business practice. One which I fully support.
The article highlights how rising expenses for landlords are contributing to rent increases, not just profit-seeking.
However, it seems like what Joshua mentioned regarding, AMH & Tricon, is simply about adding fees that offer no value in order increase profits.But, I want to address your comparison to BiggerPockets.
Our situation is quite different from the large rental companies mentioned.
At BiggerPockets, we've actually worked hard to keep our core membership costs stable while significantly increasing the value we provide. Our Pro Membership has remained at $39/month, even as we've added tons of new features and content.We've invested heavily in tools like the Market Finder and Deal Finder, partnered to offer free RentRedi subscriptions, and expanded our podcast lineup with shows like The Money Show, The Rookie Real Estate Show, and On The Market presented by Fundrise.
All of this is aimed at providing more value to our members without hiking prices.While I understand your perspective, I don't think it's accurate to compare our approach to the fee increases mentioned in the article. We haven't raised membership costs, and we're constantly adding new features that bring more value to our audience. If we ever need to adjust pricing in the future, it will be to support continued improvements and expanded offerings for our members.
Our goal is focused on delivering more value to our community. :)
BP’s goal, like virtually all businesses, is to maximize profit. BP in not a non profit. Profit can be achieved by volume and/or price. The features added ideally increases membership to justify the costs.
How come foreclosure access is additional cost on BP? How is this different than other business’ add on costs?
The reason AMH & Tricon fees are unacceptable is a mindset that looks less favorable on profit from residential housing than virtually any other business. BP should not succumb to these beliefs. It should encourage a free economy with respect to residential housing recognizing that large profits would encourage competition/development.
I don’t think that this is the reason. I think a lot of people feel that there is a lot of bait and switch going on in the housing markets. As others have said it costs thousands of dollars to move, so if landlords are aggressively raising rents or adding lots of “hidden” fees, it’s not surprising renters feel taken advantage of. That’s probably not what’s going on here, but lots of folks have had bad experiences or know someone who has.
- Rental Property Investor · New Braunfels, TX · Member since 2022 · 408 posts · 408 votes2yYou used to be able to go in person to talk to them but it's all online here now. If you don't like their answer then you have to go in person to the "review board" of 3 people. I've only had to do that one time in the last 8 years, usually they just lower it.
Quote from @James Hamling:
The best one one was when my husband walked into the tax office about 8 years ago and showed them that our house value had went up by 50% in one year, the lady looked at it, says wow, that's terrible and lowered the value to less than it was the previous year! I'm telling you, they just make numbers up hoping people don't appeal. - Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes2y
Quote from @Account Closed:
You used to be able to go in person to talk to them but it's all online here now. If you don't like their answer then you have to go in person to the "review board" of 3 people. I've only had to do that one time in the last 8 years, usually they just lower it.Quote from @James Hamling:
The best one one was when my husband walked into the tax office about 8 years ago and showed them that our house value had went up by 50% in one year, the lady looked at it, says wow, that's terrible and lowered the value to less than it was the previous year! I'm telling you, they just make numbers up hoping people don't appeal.In what state is this?
- Rental Property Investor · New Braunfels, TX · Member since 2022 · 408 posts · 408 votes2yTexas.
Quote from @James Hamling:
- 2yDan H.Pro MemberInvestor · Poway, CA · Member since 2015 · 7k+ posts · 8k+ votes
Quote from @Peter W.:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Michael Calvey:
@James Hamling I appreciate you bringing this up. It's an important distinction to make.Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Michael Calvey:
@Joshua Mumford Wow. This is frustrating. "Tricon Residential, iincreased its fee revenue by 42% since the pandemic." Its a bit predatory to me.
Huh, ya don't say.... So what would you call the assorted actions BP has done to increase revenues as of recent? "Bad for thee but not for me" kind of thing?.......
You're right that passing on legitimate increased costs to customers is a normal business practice. One which I fully support.
The article highlights how rising expenses for landlords are contributing to rent increases, not just profit-seeking.
However, it seems like what Joshua mentioned regarding, AMH & Tricon, is simply about adding fees that offer no value in order increase profits.But, I want to address your comparison to BiggerPockets.
Our situation is quite different from the large rental companies mentioned.
At BiggerPockets, we've actually worked hard to keep our core membership costs stable while significantly increasing the value we provide. Our Pro Membership has remained at $39/month, even as we've added tons of new features and content.We've invested heavily in tools like the Market Finder and Deal Finder, partnered to offer free RentRedi subscriptions, and expanded our podcast lineup with shows like The Money Show, The Rookie Real Estate Show, and On The Market presented by Fundrise.
All of this is aimed at providing more value to our members without hiking prices.While I understand your perspective, I don't think it's accurate to compare our approach to the fee increases mentioned in the article. We haven't raised membership costs, and we're constantly adding new features that bring more value to our audience. If we ever need to adjust pricing in the future, it will be to support continued improvements and expanded offerings for our members.
Our goal is focused on delivering more value to our community. :)
BP’s goal, like virtually all businesses, is to maximize profit. BP in not a non profit. Profit can be achieved by volume and/or price. The features added ideally increases membership to justify the costs.
How come foreclosure access is additional cost on BP? How is this different than other business’ add on costs?
The reason AMH & Tricon fees are unacceptable is a mindset that looks less favorable on profit from residential housing than virtually any other business. BP should not succumb to these beliefs. It should encourage a free economy with respect to residential housing recognizing that large profits would encourage competition/development.
I don’t think that this is the reason. I think a lot of people feel that there is a lot of bait and switch going on in the housing markets. As others have said it costs thousands of dollars to move, so if landlords are aggressively raising rents or adding lots of “hidden” fees, it’s not surprising renters feel taken advantage of. That’s probably not what’s going on here, but lots of folks have had bad experiences or know someone who has.
This may be market specific, but in my market the average placed tenant is paying a lower rent than current market rent. In addition, the RE has appreciated much faster than rents. Yet tenants still complain about rent increases.
In 2012, you could find 1% rent ratios. Now the average MLS purchase is below 0.5% ratio. This shows property values have gone up nearly twice what rents have increased. The tenants want to live in highly desirable area, but they do not want to pay the cost to live in a highly desirable area.
Imagine if rents had actually kept up with RE prices? Rents would be nearly double the current rent.
Best wishes
- 2yV.G JasonPro MemberInvestor · Member since 2022 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
Quote from @Saad D.:
@V.G Jason Thanks for the recommendation. What do you mean by consolidation?
Less units, less debt, higher quality properties.
- Property Manager · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2023 · 11 posts · 8 votes2y
Quote from @James Hamling:
And yes, if I could, I'd add a fee's list a mile long, if I could get it, damn right.
To me the issue isn't charging fees and making profit as much as it is doing so without providing tangible value in return
A business exchange should result in value added not extracted—charging a 50% leasing fee to then only do remote showings, charging a $25/mo smart-home fee because of an added a $50 wifi-enabled thermostat
My clients pay management fees as high as 20%, none lower than 13%, and in return they receive comprehensive property management
My residents pay nothing other than rent, because they're not clients
I can't complain though, because if it weren't for the industry's standard practices becoming this way, I wouldn't have my niche
- Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes2y
Quote from @Joshua Mumford:
Quote from @James Hamling:
And yes, if I could, I'd add a fee's list a mile long, if I could get it, damn right.
To me the issue isn't charging fees......
...My clients pay management fees as high as 20%......
Ok, so let me get this straight....
Your standing here, hocky mask n gloves on, bragging about the giant bag of loot slung over your shoulder how ya just robbed the landlord's for 20%.....
Pointing across the street telling us what crooks those "other guys" are.......
- Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes2y
Quote from @Peter W.:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Michael Calvey:
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Michael Calvey:
I don’t think that this is the reason. I think a lot of people feel that there is a lot of bait and switch going on in the housing markets. As others have said it costs thousands of dollars to move, so if landlords are aggressively raising rents or adding lots of “hidden” fees, it’s not surprising renters feel taken advantage of. That’s probably not what’s going on here, but lots of folks have had bad experiences or know someone who has.
Woah woah woah, hold-up, stop the car right there, hold on, back it on up buckaroo.....
Exactly what in the fogazzi does the moving costs have to do with anything?!
So let me get this straight; F-economics, F-the reasons for rent increases, no F-it all because "Ugh, think make me brain owie" so it's just a straight line thing for ya that moving really ate into your daily Starbucks budget so Landlords should be picking up the bill?
because lord forbid ya go a week without the $300mnth Goat Yoga membership, or the daily $10 non-fat triple soy late caramel twist double shot stirred not shaken starbucks.... Or the 14 streaming subscriptions, and man alive there is a new i-phone that has 7 cameras and it's "only" $4,000 I mean how could one possibly go without the 7th camera come on, and the current phone is like soooooooo old you've had it like 6 whole months.......
wtf..... Serious What in the FLOCK!
.... So paying someone 30% to carry your food across a room is a-ok but if that landlord dare raise rent on the HOME I live in..... What the *(#$*.....
$4 a gal gas, a-ok...... $10 coffee, AWESOME!...... $500+mnth for the digital appendage from hand and on tv shows, gotta have it!...... But for a roof over your head THAT, that's the guy who's "sticking it to ya" and damn that crook to hell.......
Make it make sense...... Please, someone, make-it-make-sense!
- 2yDan H.Pro MemberInvestor · Poway, CA · Member since 2015 · 7k+ posts · 8k+ votes
Quote from @Joshua Mumford:
Quote from @James Hamling:
And yes, if I could, I'd add a fee's list a mile long, if I could get it, damn right.
To me the issue isn't charging fees and making profit as much as it is doing so without providing tangible value in return
A business exchange should result in value added not extracted—charging a 50% leasing fee to then only do remote showings, charging a $25/mo smart-home fee because of an added a $50 wifi-enabled thermostat
My clients pay management fees as high as 20%, none lower than 13%, and in return they receive comprehensive property management
My residents pay nothing other than rent, because they're not clients
I can't complain though, because if it weren't for the industry's standard practices becoming this way, I wouldn't have my niche
>My clients pay management fees as high as 20%, none lower than 13%, and in return they receive comprehensive property management
Is this for LTR property management? It is the highest I have ever seen if this is for LTR. I think you should charge what you can get. Maybe this is d class area where collecting rent has challenges, inspection should be done often, lots of tenant conflict, etc.
Again I am definitely you should not charge what you can get, but I am trying to understand how you can charge 13% to 20%. Maybe it is STR management which would be on the lower price of STR PMs.
Best wishes
- Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes2y
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Joshua Mumford:
Quote from @James Hamling:
And yes, if I could, I'd add a fee's list a mile long, if I could get it, damn right.
To me the issue isn't charging fees and making profit as much as it is doing so without providing tangible value in return
A business exchange should result in value added not extracted—charging a 50% leasing fee to then only do remote showings, charging a $25/mo smart-home fee because of an added a $50 wifi-enabled thermostat
My clients pay management fees as high as 20%, none lower than 13%, and in return they receive comprehensive property management
My residents pay nothing other than rent, because they're not clients
I can't complain though, because if it weren't for the industry's standard practices becoming this way, I wouldn't have my niche
>My clients pay management fees as high as 20%, none lower than 13%, and in return they receive comprehensive property management
Is this for LTR property management? It is the highest I have ever seen if this is for LTR. I think you should charge what you can get. Maybe this is d class area where collecting rent has challenges, inspection should be done often, lots of tenant conflict, etc.
Again I am definitely you should not charge what you can get, but I am trying to understand how you can charge 13% to 20%. Maybe it is STR management which would be on the lower price of STR PMs.
Best wishes
But Dan, don't you see how "better" he is, he doesn't charge anything to the tenant...... No, he just nails the landlords with the inflated bill and we all know if landlord is paying it's "FREE" for tenant..... Not like, IDK, landlord will pass that expense through to tenant via price......
Crayola economic's at it's best....
- Property Manager · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2023 · 11 posts · 8 votes2y
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Joshua Mumford:
Quote from @James Hamling:
And yes, if I could, I'd add a fee's list a mile long, if I could get it, damn right.
To me the issue isn't charging fees and making profit as much as it is doing so without providing tangible value in return
A business exchange should result in value added not extracted—charging a 50% leasing fee to then only do remote showings, charging a $25/mo smart-home fee because of an added a $50 wifi-enabled thermostat
My clients pay management fees as high as 20%, none lower than 13%, and in return they receive comprehensive property management
My residents pay nothing other than rent, because they're not clients
I can't complain though, because if it weren't for the industry's standard practices becoming this way, I wouldn't have my niche
>My clients pay management fees as high as 20%, none lower than 13%, and in return they receive comprehensive property management
Is this for LTR property management? It is the highest I have ever seen if this is for LTR. I think you should charge what you can get. Maybe this is d class area where collecting rent has challenges, inspection should be done often, lots of tenant conflict, etc.
Again I am definitely you should not charge what you can get, but I am trying to understand how you can charge 13% to 20%. Maybe it is STR management which would be on the lower price of STR PMs.
Best wishes
But Dan, don't you see how "better" he is, he doesn't charge anything to the tenant...... No, he just nails the landlords with the inflated bill and we all know if landlord is paying it's "FREE" for tenant..... Not like, IDK, landlord will pass that expense through to tenant via price......
Crayola economic's at it's best....
I pay for the lawn care, pest control, Surevestor, actually replace the air filters, and that's the only fee an owner ever pays.
The goal is to secure a premium rent by providing a premium experience, but the renter knows the number up front and they're not getting back doored with move-in and admin fees and mandatory "benefits"
If anything that approach is better for the LL because we're sharing in the increased rent potential instead of just hogging all of the fees from marked-up ancillary services
- Real Estate Broker · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2011 · 5k+ posts · 6k+ votes2y
Quote from @Joshua Mumford:
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Joshua Mumford:
Quote from @James Hamling:
And yes, if I could, I'd add a fee's list a mile long, if I could get it, damn right.
To me the issue isn't charging fees and making profit as much as it is doing so without providing tangible value in return
A business exchange should result in value added not extracted—charging a 50% leasing fee to then only do remote showings, charging a $25/mo smart-home fee because of an added a $50 wifi-enabled thermostat
My clients pay management fees as high as 20%, none lower than 13%, and in return they receive comprehensive property management
My residents pay nothing other than rent, because they're not clients
I can't complain though, because if it weren't for the industry's standard practices becoming this way, I wouldn't have my niche
>My clients pay management fees as high as 20%, none lower than 13%, and in return they receive comprehensive property management
Is this for LTR property management? It is the highest I have ever seen if this is for LTR. I think you should charge what you can get. Maybe this is d class area where collecting rent has challenges, inspection should be done often, lots of tenant conflict, etc.
Again I am definitely you should not charge what you can get, but I am trying to understand how you can charge 13% to 20%. Maybe it is STR management which would be on the lower price of STR PMs.
Best wishes
But Dan, don't you see how "better" he is, he doesn't charge anything to the tenant...... No, he just nails the landlords with the inflated bill and we all know if landlord is paying it's "FREE" for tenant..... Not like, IDK, landlord will pass that expense through to tenant via price......
Crayola economic's at it's best....
I pay for the lawn care, pest control, Surevestor, actually replace the air filters, and that's the only fee an owner ever pays.
The goal is to secure a premium rent by providing a premium experience, but the renter knows the number up front and they're not getting back doored with move-in and admin fees and mandatory "benefits"
If anything that approach is better for the LL because we're sharing in the increased rent potential instead of just hogging all of the fees from marked-up ancillary services
Yeah i get it, your fart's smell like roses, the rest of us PMc's just poo, got-it.
- Property Manager · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2023 · 11 posts · 8 votes2y
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Joshua Mumford:
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Joshua Mumford:
Quote from @James Hamling:
And yes, if I could, I'd add a fee's list a mile long, if I could get it, damn right.
To me the issue isn't charging fees and making profit as much as it is doing so without providing tangible value in return
A business exchange should result in value added not extracted—charging a 50% leasing fee to then only do remote showings, charging a $25/mo smart-home fee because of an added a $50 wifi-enabled thermostat
My clients pay management fees as high as 20%, none lower than 13%, and in return they receive comprehensive property management
My residents pay nothing other than rent, because they're not clients
I can't complain though, because if it weren't for the industry's standard practices becoming this way, I wouldn't have my niche
>My clients pay management fees as high as 20%, none lower than 13%, and in return they receive comprehensive property management
Is this for LTR property management? It is the highest I have ever seen if this is for LTR. I think you should charge what you can get. Maybe this is d class area where collecting rent has challenges, inspection should be done often, lots of tenant conflict, etc.
Again I am definitely you should not charge what you can get, but I am trying to understand how you can charge 13% to 20%. Maybe it is STR management which would be on the lower price of STR PMs.
Best wishes
But Dan, don't you see how "better" he is, he doesn't charge anything to the tenant...... No, he just nails the landlords with the inflated bill and we all know if landlord is paying it's "FREE" for tenant..... Not like, IDK, landlord will pass that expense through to tenant via price......
Crayola economic's at it's best....
I pay for the lawn care, pest control, Surevestor, actually replace the air filters, and that's the only fee an owner ever pays.
The goal is to secure a premium rent by providing a premium experience, but the renter knows the number up front and they're not getting back doored with move-in and admin fees and mandatory "benefits"
If anything that approach is better for the LL because we're sharing in the increased rent potential instead of just hogging all of the fees from marked-up ancillary services
Yeah i get it, your fart's smell like roses, the rest of us PMc's just poo, got-it.
Did you miss the part where I said the only issue in my opinion is when the fees don't have a proportionate value to the residents?
- Attorney · Worton, MD · Member since 2014 · 274 posts · 195 votes2y
Quote from @Jeremy Horton:
I think:
1) Landlords are going to make as much profit as they reasonably can. The market will set the price for rentals if it is allowed to operate freely. If the rent is too high people move. If the rent is too low, it will come up due to demand.
EXACTLY!!!!
Why would anyone think that the price of rent has anymore to do with "greedy" people than the price of a new car, or a new cell phone?!?! Pop culture has made it acceptable to vilify property owners/landlords because they are the "nemesis you see" when you cannot pay your rent. Nobody thinks the electric company is evil because they shut off the power when you don't pay your bill. Landlords are no different. You get what you pay for, and if you can't pay for it ... - Member since 2018 · 17 posts · 4 votes2y
Quote from @Julie Garner:
Yep, the taxes. I realize it's not my right to tell people how to vote, but I'd like to put a clause in that reads, "Every time a levy, school tax increase, or special tax assessment passes, rent will increase by 5x the amount of that cost." Because you KNOW it's not the people paying the property taxes that are voting for this crap.
I pay property tax on 8 properties and still vote for tax increases for schools. Public education in Florida is significantly worse now then it was when I grew up. Strong public education is a foundational element of democracy and an important part of maintaining the middle class.
- Member since 2023 · 40 posts · 44 votes2y
IME, you're the exception. The overwhelming majority of people I've met who consistently vote for tax increases are under the impression that other people are going to pay for it. They don't connect the dots because "the government" is going to pay for it. I'm glad to hear that you vote for what to do with your own money. In a Republic, a nation of law, that's as it should be.
To keep this on track, what to do to make housing more affordable? One thing is to make it much easier and faster to evict those who do not pay or those who are irresponsible. The costs to evict and/or *try* to collect unpaid rent has to be factored in to an overall property portfolio. That raises rent for those who do pay their bills on time.
Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.