All Forum Posts by: Adam Christopher Zaleski

I moved to Pueblo West in August 2019. When I first got here, I thought buying one of the nicer duplexes would be a nice long term play. It might not cash flow a ton, I think you could get good tenants in that area and it should be relatively simple, as far as rentals go. I kept busy with my current rentals and never pulled the trigger. 

Pueblo West has higher rents than Pueblo because the prices are higher in Pueblo West and Pueblo West has better schools. For the rental analysis, it looks like they pulled the taxes from 2018. On a 420K duplex, the annual taxes are going to be $3600/year, not $1700/year. The property taxes on my house were $1200/year in 2018. The property taxes are $2950/year for 2024. 

It doesn't seem like a good fit between buyer and agent. Most agents try to find primary homes for people, not deals for investors.

I don't really subscribe to the idea of "The worst is that they can say no." You can ask for something reasonable and get it. If you ask for something unreasonable, you can be left with zero. 

One of my friends was selling a condo in a seller's market. If the buyer asked for 2 or 3 things to be fixed, my friend would have done it. Well, the buyer gave my friend a laundry list of 8-10 things that they wanted fixed. My friend got upset and refused to fix anything. He also made the transaction as difficult as possible for the buyer to the end. I think it's possible to ask for "too much" and it can hurt you sometimes. It's possible your agent is protecting you from asking for "too much" 

My approach to real estate is very passive. I've been making small efforts and decisions over the past 15 years that have made a meaningful difference in my life. Try to create something sustainable. Make a decision today that will benefit you in 15-20 years. I see others chasing short-term returns and then burn out within 5 years, quit and never return. I would advise against doing that. 

@Adam Martin Truth!

I don't think it's the community. I think it's the people. I personally rent to young professionals that are currently saving to buy a house. Before that, it was mostly college students. They are college educated and their salaries are rising faster than the cost of housing. They end up buying a house within 2-3 years. If they are good tenants, I offer a discount on the rent if they want to re-new the lease for one more year. 

As an investor, I think it's important to create a plan that is sustainable. I have seen other people get obsessed with analyzing properties on the spread sheets and pick the rental that looks best on paper. Those people either lose money or quit after two rentals because of too many headaches. 

Value is location, location, location. Good location = good tenants. If you want a deal, try to buy the ugliest house in the neighborhood but still has good bones. 

I teach college as my full-time gig and get really bummed out when kids put limits on themselves, especially when it's really easy stuff. For example, accumulating 1 million dollars of net worth. 

From my experience, the origin of the problem is letting other people put limits on yourself. When someone says, "You can't do that" what they really mean is, "I can't do that." 

Different people have different comfort levels of risk. The weird part is that very few recognize that it's their own personal appetite for risk. Many mistakenly believe that their specific appetite for risk is the "correct risk" It might be correct for them, but not for everyone. 

I really like the passive part of real estate investing. I hustled when I was younger, but I don't have to do that anymore. I have 3 rentals (4 doors) and a primary. I work around 1,000 hours/year at my day job and 200 hours/year on my rentals. It's a great life. I'm not really impressed with someone who has 50 units, a lower net worth and works 2500 hours/year. More units is not always better. 

I really don't like the 1% rule and don't use it. It's a proxy for cash flow, but it doesn't really do that because it ignores the interest rate on the loan, property taxes and insurance. If the end goal is cash flow, look for cash flow. 

It's pretty easy to find rental properties at 0.75% that cash flow better than 1% properties. From my experience 1% rental properties have expensive property taxes and/or expensive flood insurance. The 1% rentals are also very hard to find in low interest rate environments. 

I have a long-term rental in Fort Collins, CO. It's a 4 bed/2 bath single family that is within 1/2 mile of CSU Fort Collins, CO. 

It's true that Fort Collins has cracked down on STR's. However, STR's in Fort Collins are defined as rental leases for 30 days or less. If you rent for 31 days, it's considered a long-term rental. If you are renting a house furnished for at least 31 days, it doesn't break any rules.

I have another long-term rental in Koloa, HI that I treat as a mid-term rental. According to Kauai County, a STR is anything less than 6 months. I rent my house furnished with a 6 month initial lease and then transitions month to month.

I think it's helpful to know that different definitions for STR exist in different markets.

 Nathan is not missing your point. Nathan is describing the situation from the agent perspective. You are describing the situation from the client perspective. 

Based on your second sentence, it really looks like you do not value your agent. As a result, I'm going to have to agree with Nathan. A good agent that helps you get more deals does not get evaluated based on gift giving. The "gift" is closing on the deal. If you don't have a good agent that can close, there is no transaction and you lose the deal.  

Not valuing your agent by itself is not a bad thing. However, if you feel like the relationship is unequal, you should be negotiating before the transaction, not after the transaction. Asking for a larger gift, after the transaction, is a bad look in general.