All Forum Posts by: Paul Choate

@Tarek Saad 

@JJ Gritts 

@Amine E. 

@Rhett Tullis 

@Sara Cunningham 

@Creston Gerth 

@Faye Herl 

Started a new thread for the October meeting...

We will be having our October meetup on Tuesday the 28th at 

5111 N Classen Blvd

Oklahoma City, OK 73118

Time: NOON

We had a great turnout last time and hope to see new people there. Please let me know if you are attending so I can get a general head count. Thanks!

Oklahoma Oklahoma City

Cash flow because I am in Oklahoma. My last house was $8000 all in and rents for $400 per month. If the rent can't buy the house in 3-5 years, I am not interested! My situation allows me to deal with the management/maintenance this class of property requires. The goal is always going to be cash flow for me. I intend to trade up once I have a solid cash flowing base. I will just move to higher quality properties with less headaches.

@Bill Gulley I think you prove the rule, so to speak. Your comments are well articulated and come from a place of knowledge and experience. I benefit from your comments. I would like to hear what you have to say when topics like this come up.

In the market place of ideas, sunlight really is the best disinfectant. Individuals should be willing and prepared to defend their practices. You ask for a better way. BP is the better way because you and others like you are willing to take the time to address this and other topics.

@Brandon Turner works for me! I don't envy your job but I admire how you do it. Thanks for the additional info.

@Account Closed I agree. I don't know the process of how a post becomes official but I would rather I get a wide range of views and then everyone gives their opinion. 

I guess all I am suggesting is that when lines are drawn, we error on the side of too much. If you are not uncomfortable occasionally, then you are probably missing critical knowledge even if it is for defense. 

@Account Closed laid out in his discussion of reputation.

@Bill Gulley I was with you until the edit. You don't get to decide what is legal. In this specific instance, this discussion turns on a matter of intent. That has to be proved based on facts. The reason you can exclude convicted sex offenders from parks is because society has decided that we do not want individuals with a high recidivism rate around our kids. 

You are right that the rules ("law") are set by the participants. I assume Brandon and Josh are monitoring these comments and I don't want the bar to be set as low as some have suggested.This is not a sand box. You have to assume a minimal level of competency on the part of the participants or the entire system breaks down. I don't want a nanny state in my real estate education.

I have yet to meet a real estate investor who has not made major mistakes costing thousands of dollars. That is the price of admission. Everyone needs to recognize that. I want to know everything I can. I don't need a filter. One important lesson I have learned from being a lawyer is every side thinks they are right. 50% of the time they are wrong. Not good odds for setting absolutes.

@Account Closed Thank you. You are right in some ways because I did give the article too much of a pass. I will freely admit that I tend to give others the benefit of the doubt to a fault. I would have readily agreed with the other posters if it was just a discussion about the intent portion and how the advice was presented. I have the biggest problem with the censorship issue. I have learned from your posts and others and I don't want to lose that.

@Account Closed  For some of us this is not a game. When you start throwing around legality and ethics when describing a technique you should be careful. For those of us who do real estate deals on a regular basis, it is imperative to know everything you can. You should have every tool at your disposal. I purchased a house once where a wall had slipped off the foundation and it was hidden by furniture and other items during the walk through and inspection (admittedly poorly done). The seller had obviously known about it as they had done work on it. No disclosure. I was new and went in a little too trusting. I got burned. I am a big boy so I can rub some dirt on it and move on. However, I will use a properly negotiated inspection clause to protect myself and get a better deal if it is appropriate. I have purchased 6 properties in the past year. Everyone of them had hidden surprises that the owner had to know about that were not disclosed. I paid going in knowing that. After reading this post and the comments about it, I know more about this topic and how to handle this situation in the future.

I believe that everyone is focusing on the intent and not denigrating the techniques (with the exception of the advice to the seller about future discloses). I agree with the intent discussion. I maintain that every one of these techniques can be legitimately used by an ethical investor. You can corrupt anything if you try hard enough. You can also find a fact pattern that supports just about anything. Absolutes are never right;).