Watch the New York Times trash real estate investing

12 Replies

NYT takes swipe at real estate investing

It touches on how folks aren't able to afford starter homes anymore because investors are swooping in with cash. It goes through a few stories of people having to pay over the list price for a home they want. 

What they seem to gloss over is that these 'normal buyers' are trying to purchase homes needing rehabs. As we know, over 90% of homes on the MLS will likely be bought by a normal owner-occupant.

The post seems to be more a dog whistle as you'll see in the comments on FB (where I found the ad as they're running ads to it)

Most of the commenters are 'anti investors' who are complaining that it's hard to find affordable homes anymore. One commenter recommended abolishing all real estate investing and requiring people to live in a house 5 years before selling...

I'm in Woodstock GA (40 min NW of ATL) and prices are indeed appreciating. But there does seem to be a slowdown at the $400k+ range. 

What do you think? Are first time home buyers being "forced" into expensive homes if they don't want to rent anymore. 

I believe the problem is the entitlement. Yes, everyone should have a place to live. Are you entitled to a large house just because you see other people have one? No. There are plenty of lower priced homes that are non-distressed that can be purchased. But, no one wants that. 

@Joe Cassandra

I wouldn't call that a 'swipe.'  Looked like journalism to me.

A lot of verifiable actual data points, coupled with an inference to a trend.  Just because a news agency ran an article pointing out a trend and its impact on people (including people that identify as investors) - I wouldn't assume this is a 'swipe' or even negative.

It's when we stick our heads in the dirt where the real risk exists.

There's no recommendation of policy here - by the way.  If this article advocated rent controls, across the board, then yes I'd call that a 'swipe.'  We don't do ourselves favors by not acknowledging the impact, or perception of impact, on the average (especially first time) home-buyer.

Honestly this seems to be a well researched, relatively unbiased article that sticks to facts and numbers.

It is true that a lot of young people are not able to afford a starter home. In fact, majority of them are not able to afford a starter home in 74% of the country. Instead they rent. Buy homes, rent them out. Buy apartment buildings and collect the rent checks. Renting is on the rise, home ownership is dropping. 

Yes pretty good article, by the way they hit the nsil on the head on beltline in Atlanta

The world central banks pumped $10 trillion into world economies and have kept interest rates near zero. All that money is chasing yield. It's rocket fuel for asset values.

Home starters can buy starter homes just like everyone else. They are going to find more in the outer realms of the metropolis’ and not inside, unless they want less or will rent. Atlanta has houses of all shapes and sizes. It’s only excuses that a certain location must be had. Sorry, join the party. We are all fighting for that location to be in, and many times the grass doesn’t stay greener there. With the Ibuyers and syndicates assuming more , be aware of regulations that may come about infringing on the 

 buyers and investors. This is my fear not takeovers. 

If there is another “crash”, then be sure these conglomerates are not to big to fail. Who knows , they may need to sell off at better prices deplete some of there assets. 

@Mike Dymski agree 100%. It’s never been easier to purchase real estate from an investor or owner occupant standpoint. If you can’t buy a home now with interest rates this low and economy this good, not sure when you will be able to.

Originally posted by @Garrett Hawk :

@Mike Dymski agree 100%. It’s never been easier to purchase real estate from an investor or owner occupant standpoint. If you can’t buy a home now with interest rates this low and economy this good, not sure when you will be able to.

There have been lots of time periods where it has been easier or more affordable to purchase a home than it is now (including much of the past 15 years).

@Jim Goebel Agree, "trashed" isn't the right word.

But when they run FB ads to a post getting 500+ comments bashing RE investing...I think they know the angle they're taking :)

I worked in advertising for the Atlanta newspaper for 20+ years back in the days when newspapers were printing money, the most profitable form of media at the time. Well, we know what happened. They need clicks to drive advertising to stay alive. Newspaper were the best source for investigative reporting. I thought it was good reporting, though it is slightly biased as I’ve never seen a NYT article favorable to Atlanta, yet half of NY has moved here. Had this discussion just the other day while in New York, before the lights went out. 

I was in Lisbon, Portugal last week. Their story was similar. It's not about Atlanta.

I thought it was a good article.  Atlanta was hit hard -- too hard.  Smart investors found a way to buy (and even smarter ones held on).  Homeowner occupants have certainly benefited from the surge as areas of Atlanta recovered.  First time buyers were challenged to beat out investors on rehab projects, but flippers made lots of rehabs available to homeowner occupants (many were formerly tired rentals or vacant). 

There are a lot of stars aligning in Atlanta to make it a very hot market.  The article highlights Atlanta as an example.  NYT merely states that investors seized the opportunity.  Many homebuyers struggled to compete.  Ok. 

As a side note, the graphics and dynamic photos were awesome in this article.