Skip to content
×
Pro Members Get
Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
ANNUAL Save 16%
$32.50 /mo
$390 billed annualy
MONTHLY
$39 /mo
billed monthly
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
×
Try Pro Features for Free
Start your 7 day free trial. Pick markets, find deals, analyze and manage properties.
All Forum Categories
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

All Forum Posts by: Dan H.

Dan H. has started 29 posts and replied 6117 times.

Post: Why do people Buy Property in California

Dan H.
#2 General Landlording & Rental Properties Contributor
Posted
  • Investor
  • Poway, CA
  • Posts 6,235
  • Votes 7,240
Quote from @Ken M.:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Ken M.:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @James Wise:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @James Wise:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jonathan Small:

You've raised some valid concerns about California, and it's true that the state faces significant challenges. However, dismissing it entirely based on these issues overlooks several factors that continue to attract people and investment:

  • Diverse Economy: California boasts a massive and diverse economy, far beyond just Hollywood. It's a global leader in technology (Silicon Valley), agriculture (Central Valley), international trade (ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach), and tourism. This economic strength creates job opportunities and attracts talent from around the world.

  • Innovation and Entrepreneurship: California has a deeply ingrained culture of innovation and entrepreneurship. It's a hub for startups, venture capital, and cutting-edge research. This attracts ambitious individuals seeking to build the next big thing.

  • World-Class Universities: California is home to some of the world's most prestigious universities, including Stanford, UC Berkeley, UCLA, and Caltech. These institutions attract top students and faculty, contributing to the state's intellectual capital and driving innovation.

  • Natural Beauty and Diversity: While you mentioned the weather (which is undeniably a major draw for many), California's natural beauty extends far beyond sunny beaches. It encompasses diverse landscapes, including mountains (Sierra Nevada), forests (Redwoods), deserts (Death Valley), and national parks (Yosemite, Sequoia). This offers a wide range of outdoor activities and recreational opportunities.

  • Cultural Hubs: Cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco are major cultural centers, offering world-class museums, theaters, music venues, and diverse culinary scenes. They attract artists, creatives, and people who appreciate a vibrant urban lifestyle.

  • Real Estate Appreciation (Historically): @Dan H. points this out with his bathroom addition. While recent years have presented challenges, California real estate has historically seen significant appreciation, particularly in desirable coastal areas. This has made it an attractive investment for some, though high prices and increasing interest rates are currently impacting affordability.

Addressing your specific points:

  • High Taxes: Yes, California has high taxes, particularly income tax. However, many high-income earners are willing to pay these taxes for the perceived benefits of living and working in California, such as access to opportunities, infrastructure, and services.
  • Crime and Homelessness: These are serious issues in some parts of California, particularly in major cities. However, it's important to avoid generalizations. Crime rates vary significantly by neighborhood and city. While the homelessness crisis is a complex problem, it's not unique to California and is being addressed through various initiatives.

In summary: While California has its problems, it's not a simple case of "everything else sucks." The state's economic dynamism, natural beauty, cultural attractions, and educational institutions continue to draw people and investment. Whether these factors outweigh the challenges is a personal decision.


 San diego, los angeles, and san Francisco violent crime rate is low compared to most large cities outside california.  The 3 of them are below Cincinnati, cleveland, and toledo. 

The lowest city on the list on wikipedia for violent crime is irvine, CA

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities...

Any violent crime is too high but i travel a bit.  I feel far safer in the roughest parts of San Diego than i do in many large cities outside CA. 

People seldom look at actual crime numbers.   What they see is what their media presents to them.   A crime in a low crime area may be media worthy but the same crime in a high crime area may be just another day.

in my neighborhood (poway), kids playing doorbell ditch or riding 3 on an electric bike warrants posting on social media and dozens of comments (no exaggeration).  Must be nice that those “crimes” deserve so much attention.

It is my belief that most RE investors are best served initially investing near their home. After they have some experience they can decide if other markets are likely to suit them better.  I believe this is true for high price san Francisco and lower priced detroit and most markets in between.

Best wishes


 San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Francisco having a lower violent crime rate than Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Toledo is not an accomplishment by any means. You are comparing 3 cities where you pay one of the highest premiums in the USA to live to 3 of the cheapest cities in the USA. This would be like me telling you my Escalade drives better than your KIA. Duhhhh, of course it does. 


 The post i was replying to implied a serious crime rate in CA cities.  That is not true.


i also do not associate crime rate with cost of living and find it interesting that you do.  If you look at the list, there is not a strong correlation between price and violent crime rate but more important, the large california cities are lower than most large cities in other states. The stats seem to indicate there is not a violent crime issue in large CA cities that some people believe exists.   They have that belief in large part due to media sensationalizing certain crimes.   The violent crime stats tell a different story.


best wishes


 What kind of person doesn't associate crime rate with cost of living? Of course one would and should assume that the cost of a property in a "safe neighborhood" would be more than the cost of a similar property in a "dangerous neighborhood." That's common sense.


 I agree on a neighborhood basis.  In general higher cost neighborhoods are safer than lower cost neighborhoods. Howevr, look at the stats on a city basis.  There are LCOL cities with low crime rates and HCOL cities with high crime rates. There is not a tight coupling between price and violent crime rates. for example denton texas has one of the lowest violent crime rates.   I highly suspect few people consider it a HCOL city.  As indicated the correlation of LCOL cities having high crime rates and HCOL cities having low crime rates appears to not be strong.

Ca large cities have lower violent crime rates than many cities in other states that are a similar size. 

California has the highest rate of investor homes in the nation because of the returns that can be achieved.   There is nothing that trumps the return on why it has so many investor owned homes.  Great appreciation, great cash flow on long holds, great value add opportunities, good tenants in most areas (my city delinquency and eviction rates are near the lowest in the country).  There are lots of ways to make money in CA real estate for those that know what they are doing. 

However, i recommend newbies start in or close to their home market.  They need to identify the possibilities in their market.  After that if they believe CA is the right market for them, they can join the plethora of investors that invest from all over the world in CA RE.


good luck

Hmm, me thinks a strong case can be made for "confirmation bias" here. "Since I invest here, there must not be any problems". ;-)

 Let’s look at my claims:

- there is not a strong correlation between safety and cost of living of the city.   Not sure how that is biased, but I also provided the link and an example of one of the safer cities on the list not having a high cost of living. 
- California has highest investor ownership rate and I provided the link to the source.

- California has higher rate of return for the large coastal cities matches the stats case Shiller used to provide for total residential return for this century.   The 3 top cities where all coastal CA cities but CA cities made up a majority of top 10 cities on the list with my market at number 3 for total return for this century.  I will challenge you to find a single reputable source that does not show San Diego to have achieved outstanding long term return.

- I posted a recent rehab that I added half a bathroom out of existing space and the comps showed that half bathroom added $50k of value.   Good luck getting such significant value add in a low cost market.  This was in a property where the psf is over $1k.  
- I pointed out that my market (San Diego) has one of the lowest eviction and delinquent rates in the country.   I challenge you to find a single reputable source that shows otherwise.

I then advocated for all newbies start close to their home market.

I stand by my remarks and challenge you to show one statement to not be factual.   Facts, no need for confirmation bias.  In addition, I do not need to make more money so I am not needing to push CA RE.   Not a realtor, not a mortgage broker, not selling any mentorships (my protégés do not pay but are a very limited group).   I do not need to push CA RE and have little to gain which places me in a different category than many of the people who have posted on this thread including the OP who is a realtor, property manager, and sells mentoring (at what appears a reasonable price) in his Ohio markets.

.

I simply notice that L.A. is burning because the mayor cut fire support by $17 million dollars, she wanted to cut it more. It's fire season and she fled the state. The fire hydrants don't work, the "water lady" who gets paid $750,000 a year to turn the tap on didn't do that, and on and on and on. (I feel sorry for those firemen trying to handle the chaos, they weren't told by the reservoir people they had drained the water) The money was diverted to DEI programs of which these characters directly benefited. Just watching the news. 

That does not build confidence in investing in an area no matter how many friendly seals bark at you.

Do L.A. and California lose carbon credits for all the noxious smoke? (I know, San Diego is considerably south of L.A., been there, done that, nice place, but to most people in the U.S. and the world, L.A. / San Diego distinction is lost on them. 

Now, if I was an investor in California, would things like L.A. fires, landslides, earth quakes, taxes, canyon fires, traffic, eviction moratoriums, etc worry me? You betcha.
I spend (not so sure how much now going forward) a fair amount of time from Santa Barbara to Laguna Beach. I love the ocean. Rarely is the beach crowded though, for such a large population. How many people pay for a gym membership that they never use. Same thing. High taxes, high rate of crime. Some violent, some not, still too much crime no matter what goes on in Detroit, Baltimore, D,C., Philadelphia and so on. Just because they have more problems doesn't make California desirable. That's called a straw man argument.

My only question is if property taxes are going to go up for the people of Pacific Palisades to cover the damage the People caused to the city. Strike, that, the damage the city caused to the people. ;-) But, the people voted for them again & again, didn't they?  At some point, even the worst carpenter stops hitting his thumb on purpose, so he can experience how much better it feels when he stops.

Frankly I'm glad guys like you choose to invest where you do instead of adding yet more competition to where I invest. No harm, no foul.


 Fire victims maintain their property tax basis by law after rebuild.

not sure what any of the things you mentioned trumps return. 
 
I have offer accepted on a luxury cabin in a high fire risk area.  The insurance is high.   If it burns down it will be a pain in the *** to deal with the consequence.   However it still comes down to return and desired area.  The mountains (sierras) this cabin is in exceeds what can be found in virtually every state.

 My little beach STRs have appreciated enough that most people,e could retire on the appreciation alone from either unit.   My best revenue year was about 50% of the purchase price.   

My most recent purchase is up $1m above my costs in 3 years.

It’s the return.   That is why people invest in CA RE and more homes are investor owned in CA than any other state.   Do you think that happens without years of awesome returns?

We have owned out of state but currently all our RE is in CA because of the outstanding return.  

Post: Why do people Buy Property in California

Dan H.
#2 General Landlording & Rental Properties Contributor
Posted
  • Investor
  • Poway, CA
  • Posts 6,235
  • Votes 7,240
Quote from @Ken M.:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @James Wise:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @James Wise:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jonathan Small:

You've raised some valid concerns about California, and it's true that the state faces significant challenges. However, dismissing it entirely based on these issues overlooks several factors that continue to attract people and investment:

  • Diverse Economy: California boasts a massive and diverse economy, far beyond just Hollywood. It's a global leader in technology (Silicon Valley), agriculture (Central Valley), international trade (ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach), and tourism. This economic strength creates job opportunities and attracts talent from around the world.

  • Innovation and Entrepreneurship: California has a deeply ingrained culture of innovation and entrepreneurship. It's a hub for startups, venture capital, and cutting-edge research. This attracts ambitious individuals seeking to build the next big thing.

  • World-Class Universities: California is home to some of the world's most prestigious universities, including Stanford, UC Berkeley, UCLA, and Caltech. These institutions attract top students and faculty, contributing to the state's intellectual capital and driving innovation.

  • Natural Beauty and Diversity: While you mentioned the weather (which is undeniably a major draw for many), California's natural beauty extends far beyond sunny beaches. It encompasses diverse landscapes, including mountains (Sierra Nevada), forests (Redwoods), deserts (Death Valley), and national parks (Yosemite, Sequoia). This offers a wide range of outdoor activities and recreational opportunities.

  • Cultural Hubs: Cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco are major cultural centers, offering world-class museums, theaters, music venues, and diverse culinary scenes. They attract artists, creatives, and people who appreciate a vibrant urban lifestyle.

  • Real Estate Appreciation (Historically): @Dan H. points this out with his bathroom addition. While recent years have presented challenges, California real estate has historically seen significant appreciation, particularly in desirable coastal areas. This has made it an attractive investment for some, though high prices and increasing interest rates are currently impacting affordability.

Addressing your specific points:

  • High Taxes: Yes, California has high taxes, particularly income tax. However, many high-income earners are willing to pay these taxes for the perceived benefits of living and working in California, such as access to opportunities, infrastructure, and services.
  • Crime and Homelessness: These are serious issues in some parts of California, particularly in major cities. However, it's important to avoid generalizations. Crime rates vary significantly by neighborhood and city. While the homelessness crisis is a complex problem, it's not unique to California and is being addressed through various initiatives.

In summary: While California has its problems, it's not a simple case of "everything else sucks." The state's economic dynamism, natural beauty, cultural attractions, and educational institutions continue to draw people and investment. Whether these factors outweigh the challenges is a personal decision.


 San diego, los angeles, and san Francisco violent crime rate is low compared to most large cities outside california.  The 3 of them are below Cincinnati, cleveland, and toledo. 

The lowest city on the list on wikipedia for violent crime is irvine, CA

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities...

Any violent crime is too high but i travel a bit.  I feel far safer in the roughest parts of San Diego than i do in many large cities outside CA. 

People seldom look at actual crime numbers.   What they see is what their media presents to them.   A crime in a low crime area may be media worthy but the same crime in a high crime area may be just another day.

in my neighborhood (poway), kids playing doorbell ditch or riding 3 on an electric bike warrants posting on social media and dozens of comments (no exaggeration).  Must be nice that those “crimes” deserve so much attention.

It is my belief that most RE investors are best served initially investing near their home. After they have some experience they can decide if other markets are likely to suit them better.  I believe this is true for high price san Francisco and lower priced detroit and most markets in between.

Best wishes


 San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Francisco having a lower violent crime rate than Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Toledo is not an accomplishment by any means. You are comparing 3 cities where you pay one of the highest premiums in the USA to live to 3 of the cheapest cities in the USA. This would be like me telling you my Escalade drives better than your KIA. Duhhhh, of course it does. 


 The post i was replying to implied a serious crime rate in CA cities.  That is not true.


i also do not associate crime rate with cost of living and find it interesting that you do.  If you look at the list, there is not a strong correlation between price and violent crime rate but more important, the large california cities are lower than most large cities in other states. The stats seem to indicate there is not a violent crime issue in large CA cities that some people believe exists.   They have that belief in large part due to media sensationalizing certain crimes.   The violent crime stats tell a different story.


best wishes


 What kind of person doesn't associate crime rate with cost of living? Of course one would and should assume that the cost of a property in a "safe neighborhood" would be more than the cost of a similar property in a "dangerous neighborhood." That's common sense.


 I agree on a neighborhood basis.  In general higher cost neighborhoods are safer than lower cost neighborhoods. Howevr, look at the stats on a city basis.  There are LCOL cities with low crime rates and HCOL cities with high crime rates. There is not a tight coupling between price and violent crime rates. for example denton texas has one of the lowest violent crime rates.   I highly suspect few people consider it a HCOL city.  As indicated the correlation of LCOL cities having high crime rates and HCOL cities having low crime rates appears to not be strong.

Ca large cities have lower violent crime rates than many cities in other states that are a similar size. 

California has the highest rate of investor homes in the nation because of the returns that can be achieved.   There is nothing that trumps the return on why it has so many investor owned homes.  Great appreciation, great cash flow on long holds, great value add opportunities, good tenants in most areas (my city delinquency and eviction rates are near the lowest in the country).  There are lots of ways to make money in CA real estate for those that know what they are doing. 

However, i recommend newbies start in or close to their home market.  They need to identify the possibilities in their market.  After that if they believe CA is the right market for them, they can join the plethora of investors that invest from all over the world in CA RE.


good luck

Hmm, me thinks a strong case can be made for "confirmation bias" here. "Since I invest here, there must not be any problems". ;-)

 Let’s look at my claims:

- there is not a strong correlation between safety and cost of living of the city.   Not sure how that is biased, but I also provided the link and an example of one of the safer cities on the list not having a high cost of living. 
- California has highest investor ownership rate and I provided the link to the source.

- California has higher rate of return for the large coastal cities matches the stats case Shiller used to provide for total residential return for this century.   The 3 top cities where all coastal CA cities but CA cities made up a majority of top 10 cities on the list with my market at number 3 for total return for this century.  I will challenge you to find a single reputable source that does not show San Diego to have achieved outstanding long term return.

- I posted a recent rehab that I added half a bathroom out of existing space and the comps showed that half bathroom added $50k of value.   Good luck getting such significant value add in a low cost market.  This was in a property where the psf is over $1k.  
- I pointed out that my market (San Diego) has one of the lowest eviction and delinquent rates in the country.   I challenge you to find a single reputable source that shows otherwise.

I then advocated for all newbies start close to their home market.

I stand by my remarks and challenge you to show one statement to not be factual.   Facts, no need for confirmation bias.  In addition, I do not need to make more money so I am not needing to push CA RE.   Not a realtor, not a mortgage broker, not selling any mentorships (my protégés do not pay but are a very limited group).   I do not need to push CA RE and have little to gain which places me in a different category than many of the people who have posted on this thread including the OP who is a realtor, property manager, and sells mentoring (at what appears a reasonable price) in his Ohio markets.

Post: Running STR #s for Newbie

Dan H.
#2 General Landlording & Rental Properties Contributor
Posted
  • Investor
  • Poway, CA
  • Posts 6,235
  • Votes 7,240

I have used the STR spreadsheet That is provided by BP.. it is a fairly good start. Every property i use it i make additional tweaks.

I dislike they refer to it as Airbnb calculator. STRs, including 2 of mine existed before AirBnB. AirBnB is one of many STR OTAs. Correctly it should be called the STE calculator. Most operators post on multiple STR OTAs

https://www.biggerpockets.com/airbnb-calculator

Good luck

Post: Hot mess with a renter/squater how to get hew out ASAP

Dan H.
#2 General Landlording & Rental Properties Contributor
Posted
  • Investor
  • Poway, CA
  • Posts 6,235
  • Votes 7,240
Quote from @Craig Parsons:
Quote from @Dan H.:

Some of the advice above is not well thought out or not aware of the rules in CA.  My thoughts:

- best advice above is to get a good attorney that specializes in evictions. 
- Who ever told you that only 30 days notice is required does not know CA law.  You need to provide 60 days notice if they have been a tenant more than a year.  Hopefully the attorney informed you of this

- selling a long owned CA property that likely has significant appreciation owned by someone going into long term care is crazy stupid.   At death, the property gets a stepped up basis.  For appreciating CA properties this could easily be a 7 digit step up in value but i would think in all CA markets would be significant.   In addition due to prop 13, the tax base is a fraction of if it sold today.   This can save thousands annually.  This tax base benefit goes away at your father’s death. Much better off paying the eviction lawyer to do what they do than give up those 2 benefits.   The savings from either will be many times the cost of the lawyer.  Selling before death would be a costly mistake   

- you did not explicitly state this was not a multi family but it seems likely from your description.   Single family homes are exempt from rent control everywhere in the state.  The implication is your ex-wife cannot simply choose to stay beyond a 60 day notice.  An eviction will make it challenging for her ever to find a quality rental in low vacancy areas.  I hope your attorney has explained this to you. 

Have the lawyer deal with this.  Realize there will be a cost but also realize the value in a highly appreciated property in CA and the consequences of selling.  You will likely save 6 digits on the gains as well as 4 digits (maybe 5) on property taxes annually by waiting until death to sell the property.  

Good luck

Thanks Dan  Yes  we are not selling for the reasons you mentioned and yes we are talking 7 figures of appreciation . I was under the impression of 60 days as well. I am not sure if the Legal person I talked to understood the length of her time there so that could be the confusion.  The goal is to rehab this house then rent it to a qualified tenant until my fathers passing, at that time he has it in the will that the property is to be sold and then the profits are to be divided up between the family.  Our biggest problem is getting her out so we can do a proper rehab 60 days of dead dime waiting for her to vacate is not Ideal obviously.  I do  think your point about having an eviction on her record is a bit of leverage though.   The other potential problem is the term of the proposed renter not sure exactly we are going to deal with their lease when it comes time to sell.  

You could rent month to month.   There is risk with this approach that the tenant can have short residence or leave in Nov to January.   The positive is you can get them out with 60 day notice so 60 day escrow would allow the unit to be delivered vacant (assuming zero issues terminating the rental)

good luck

Post: brrrr loactions for under 150k

Dan H.
#2 General Landlording & Rental Properties Contributor
Posted
  • Investor
  • Poway, CA
  • Posts 6,235
  • Votes 7,240

I agree so much with @Jonathan Greene.   At the low value of cleveland, a small count LL cannot cashflow even with a well above 1% monthly to value cash ratio.  The maintenance/cap ex will consume a large percentage of the rent.  

I do want to correct one thing jonathon stated.  It is not the interest rates alone that make the property negative after the high ltv refi.   It is the combination of the worst rent to value ratio ever (e separate studies show this) combined with the high interest rates.  

I have made a lot of money doing BRRRRs.  Most of my RE has achieved the elusive infinite return because i extracted all of my investment.   At this time, i am not actively pursuing BRRRRs and realize i have successfully done quite a few.  

This is not the correct market to attempt your first brrrr. There is a reason BRRRRs are getting so little attention now. Even @david greene the author of the brrrr book indicated publicly that he is no longer pursuing BRRRRs. That speaks volume about the challenges of doing a BRRRR in this market.

Good luck

Post: Sub 2 Financing

Dan H.
#2 General Landlording & Rental Properties Contributor
Posted
  • Investor
  • Poway, CA
  • Posts 6,235
  • Votes 7,240

My opinion only 2 cases make sense for the seller 1) they have few options and this presents the best means to get out if a bad situation.   They recognize the buyer can destroy the seller credit, but they are in such dire straights that the risk is justified 2) the seller knows the buyer and has so much trust in the buyer that they have every confidence that the buyer will perform on the loan.

From a buyer, it provides a means to get an interest rate from NLT q1 2022 that is a fraction of today’s rate.  They realize the due on sale clause could get exercised and believe the risk is justified by the reduced rate. Ideally they did not pay over retail because if they did they could easily lose the money they put into the property if the loan gets called.  Best case under such circumstance is they find alternative financing and simply over paid for the property.


good luck

Post: Hot mess with a renter/squater how to get hew out ASAP

Dan H.
#2 General Landlording & Rental Properties Contributor
Posted
  • Investor
  • Poway, CA
  • Posts 6,235
  • Votes 7,240

Some of the advice above is not well thought out or not aware of the rules in CA.  My thoughts:

- best advice above is to get a good attorney that specializes in evictions. 
- Who ever told you that only 30 days notice is required does not know CA law.  You need to provide 60 days notice if they have been a tenant more than a year.  Hopefully the attorney informed you of this

- selling a long owned CA property that likely has significant appreciation owned by someone going into long term care is crazy stupid.   At death, the property gets a stepped up basis.  For appreciating CA properties this could easily be a 7 digit step up in value but i would think in all CA markets would be significant.   In addition due to prop 13, the tax base is a fraction of if it sold today.   This can save thousands annually.  This tax base benefit goes away at your father’s death. Much better off paying the eviction lawyer to do what they do than give up those 2 benefits.   The savings from either will be many times the cost of the lawyer.  Selling before death would be a costly mistake   

- you did not explicitly state this was not a multi family but it seems likely from your description.   Single family homes are exempt from rent control everywhere in the state.  The implication is your ex-wife cannot simply choose to stay beyond a 60 day notice.  An eviction will make it challenging for her ever to find a quality rental in low vacancy areas.  I hope your attorney has explained this to you. 

Have the lawyer deal with this.  Realize there will be a cost but also realize the value in a highly appreciated property in CA and the consequences of selling.  You will likely save 6 digits on the gains as well as 4 digits (maybe 5) on property taxes annually by waiting until death to sell the property.  

Good luck

Post: My San Diego personal house hack now for sale!

Dan H.
#2 General Landlording & Rental Properties Contributor
Posted
  • Investor
  • Poway, CA
  • Posts 6,235
  • Votes 7,240

We are in january 2025.  If you can live in the unit until june 2025, you will have the 2 of 5 years gain exemption so that $500k (married couple) is tax exempt.   I do not know your gain, but i would at a minimum look into this option to determine if it warrants staying in your existing home for ~5 additional months.


good luck

Post: Is Relying on Cash Flow Feasible?

Dan H.
#2 General Landlording & Rental Properties Contributor
Posted
  • Investor
  • Poway, CA
  • Posts 6,235
  • Votes 7,240
Quote from @Kevin Sobilo:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Kevin Sobilo:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Andre Brock:

For me that’s the only thing to rely upon is the cash flow. Appreciation is great until the market turns and you see that appreciation vanish ask any investor that was in the business before the crash. 


 I know of no RE investor that had RE before the crash that did not exit that would agree with your statement including this investor.  


I think every investor who takes the time to read and understand what he said would agree with @Andre Brock.

Andre was talking about someone relying on something to live on. Not simply building wealth in additional to whatever else they have going on to support them. For many people real estate is more about wealth building than generating an income to live on and for them appreciation is important.

However, this post is about an income to live on and the appreciation/equity in your properties can disappear. You can't access that value to live on if it disappears!

So, if you have a property that generates little/no cash-flow and the market value drops the property cannot help you support yourself.

Conversely, if a property that makes ample cash-flow drops in value you are still able to use that cash-flow to support yourself. You have a lot more control over cash-flow as an investor than you do market appreciation!


 I disagree with so much of this reply.  First look what he said.

>Appreciation is great until the market turns and you see that appreciation vanish ask any investor that was in the business before the crash.

“Any investor” is clear that it is any investor.  I was an RE investor at great recession.  I still consider appreciation great and i know of no investor that did not exit at the great recession that does not think that appreciation is great. In fact i will speculate the opposite as i believe virtually any investor who has held investment RE since the great recession highly values appreciation.

>if a property that makes ample cash-flow drops in value you are still able to use that cash-flow to support yourself. You have a lot more control over cash-flow as an investor than you do market appreciation!

I am unsure what control you think you have on market rents.  My market, and many markets, had little or no rent decline at the great recession so there was zero need to sell as the tenant, by paying the rent, was paying the mortgage. In my market, the fore closures were mostly not RE investors because the income did not decline (we only had 7 rentals at that time, not one had a reduction in rent). However there were other markets like Detroit, las vegas, much of arizona, much of the midwest that had large loss of rental income from a combination of higher vacancy and falling rent.  If you were in one of those markets, your cash flow vanished and in many cases the rents were insufficient to pay the mortgage.  I suspect the LLs in these markets wish they could affect market rents/vacancy but there was little they could do.  Not sure how you believe they could control their cash flow. 

Your take away on the great recession is different than mine.  My take away is cash flow is not guaranteed.   The Investors who purchased in higher initial cash flow markets in general were more prone to reduction in cash flow.   My next takeaway is that if you are not overly leverage such that you have to sell at or near the low, the value will come back and typically fairly fast.  There were quite a few years not long after the great recession that average appreciation in my market was above 20% and a couple years far above 20%.

As a RE investors at the great recession, i highly value appreciation. I intentionally minimize my cash flow (try to maintain high LTV, use accelerated depreciation to our advantage, etc) because it gets taxed annually. I plan to never pay tax on the appreciation with the current tax rules (1031, die with step up basis, etc).

Best wishes


You are way off topic. You think you are saying something when you aren't. Saying investors who held money since the great recession value appreciation says NOTHING! You didn't talk about how they managed to use real estate to pay their bills during the great recession!

I NEVER said an investor has control over MARKET RENTS! I said they have SOME control over cash-flow.

Just because SOME landlords planned poorly and weren't prepared to make moves to preserve their cash-flow doesn't mean good landlords could not.

A landlord who is not over-leveraged to begin with may simply refinance their loan even when prices go down just to re-amortize the loan and lower the payment to preserve cash-flow.

A landlord who isn't trying to get the top dollar amount for their unit to begin with has competitive advantages when things go awry.

Again, you haven't said anything so far. You talk about what you like but haven't mentioned how a typical investor can replace their income with it especially when things get rough.


 There is a tight coupling between appreciation and the cash flow over a long hold.  The long hold cash flow coupling with appreciation is much stronger correlation than there is between initial cash flow and the cash flow over a hold.  All of my rentals at the great recession maintained their positive cash flow that was the result of market rent increases that was tightly coupled to the appreciation.

So purchase with poor or no cash flow in an appreciation market and the cash flow will come with the appreciation.   Appreciation virtually always results in rent appreciation which results in increased cash flow.

Case shiller used to publish a ranking of large cities based on total residential return since the year 2000.   The large coastal California cities were ranked very high in appreciation (not surprising) but also were ranked very high for their cash flow (this could surprise some who do not recognize the coupling of appreciation and cash flow).

Initial cash flow has a poor correlation to actual cash flow over a long hold. This is not by chance as there are many factors that determine a market’s RE price.  Two key ones are expected appreciation and expected rent growth.  In general the best initial cash flow markets have poor appreciation and poor rent growth outlook.   Note the market with higher rent growth will virtually always produce the better cash flow over a long hold.   Appreciation with its tight coupling to rent growth, results in cash flow.

An example from my market, a few years ago core logic indicated the average rent increase in my market was ~$600/month.  Imagine what that type of average rent increase does to cash flow.

i recommend all new investor start in a market near them, regardless of initial cash flow or appreciation outlook.   I believe success can be achieved in both markets.   However, in general the appreciation market will produce the higher return and historically on long holds much of that return can be from cash flow.


good luck






Post: Why do people Buy Property in California

Dan H.
#2 General Landlording & Rental Properties Contributor
Posted
  • Investor
  • Poway, CA
  • Posts 6,235
  • Votes 7,240
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Scott Trench:
Quote from @James Hamling:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @James Wise:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Jonathan Small:

You've raised some valid concerns about California, and it's true that the state faces significant challenges. However, dismissing it entirely based on these issues overlooks several factors that continue to attract people and investment:

  • Diverse Economy: California boasts a massive and diverse economy, far beyond just Hollywood. It's a global leader in technology (Silicon Valley), agriculture (Central Valley), international trade (ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach), and tourism. This economic strength creates job opportunities and attracts talent from around the world.

  • Innovation and Entrepreneurship: California has a deeply ingrained culture of innovation and entrepreneurship. It's a hub for startups, venture capital, and cutting-edge research. This attracts ambitious individuals seeking to build the next big thing.

  • World-Class Universities: California is home to some of the world's most prestigious universities, including Stanford, UC Berkeley, UCLA, and Caltech. These institutions attract top students and faculty, contributing to the state's intellectual capital and driving innovation.

  • Natural Beauty and Diversity: While you mentioned the weather (which is undeniably a major draw for many), California's natural beauty extends far beyond sunny beaches. It encompasses diverse landscapes, including mountains (Sierra Nevada), forests (Redwoods), deserts (Death Valley), and national parks (Yosemite, Sequoia). This offers a wide range of outdoor activities and recreational opportunities.

  • Cultural Hubs: Cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco are major cultural centers, offering world-class museums, theaters, music venues, and diverse culinary scenes. They attract artists, creatives, and people who appreciate a vibrant urban lifestyle.

  • Real Estate Appreciation (Historically): @Dan H. points this out with his bathroom addition. While recent years have presented challenges, California real estate has historically seen significant appreciation, particularly in desirable coastal areas. This has made it an attractive investment for some, though high prices and increasing interest rates are currently impacting affordability.

Addressing your specific points:

  • High Taxes: Yes, California has high taxes, particularly income tax. However, many high-income earners are willing to pay these taxes for the perceived benefits of living and working in California, such as access to opportunities, infrastructure, and services.
  • Crime and Homelessness: These are serious issues in some parts of California, particularly in major cities. However, it's important to avoid generalizations. Crime rates vary significantly by neighborhood and city. While the homelessness crisis is a complex problem, it's not unique to California and is being addressed through various initiatives.

In summary: While California has its problems, it's not a simple case of "everything else sucks." The state's economic dynamism, natural beauty, cultural attractions, and educational institutions continue to draw people and investment. Whether these factors outweigh the challenges is a personal decision.


 San diego, los angeles, and san Francisco violent crime rate is low compared to most large cities outside california.  The 3 of them are below Cincinnati, cleveland, and toledo. 

The lowest city on the list on wikipedia for violent crime is irvine, CA

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities...

Any violent crime is too high but i travel a bit.  I feel far safer in the roughest parts of San Diego than i do in many large cities outside CA. 

People seldom look at actual crime numbers.   What they see is what their media presents to them.   A crime in a low crime area may be media worthy but the same crime in a high crime area may be just another day.

in my neighborhood (poway), kids playing doorbell ditch or riding 3 on an electric bike warrants posting on social media and dozens of comments (no exaggeration).  Must be nice that those “crimes” deserve so much attention.

It is my belief that most RE investors are best served initially investing near their home. After they have some experience they can decide if other markets are likely to suit them better.  I believe this is true for high price san Francisco and lower priced detroit and most markets in between.

Best wishes


 San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Francisco having a lower violent crime rate than Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Toledo is not an accomplishment by any means. You are comparing 3 cities where you pay one of the highest premiums in the USA to live to 3 of the cheapest cities in the USA. This would be like me telling you my Escalade drives better than your KIA. Duhhhh, of course it does. 

 The post i was replying to implied a serious crime rate in large CA cities.  That is not true.


i also do not associate crime rate with cost of living and find it interesting that you do.  If you look at the list, there is not a strong correlation between price and violent crime rate but more important, the large california cities are lower than most large cities in other states. The stats seem to indicate there is not a violent crime issue in large CA cities that some people believe exists.   They have that belief in large part due to media sensationalizing certain crimes.   The violent crime stats tell a different story.


best wishes


I have no idea where you inventing your wildly incorrect ideas that CA is some hippie commune of pacifists and happy huggers. 

Look, people are with the idea that CA has one of the HIGHEST crime rates in US, because it DOES. That's just the fact's jack. 

#6 for highest VILOENT crime rate in country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ...

#9 for most dangerous states in country by this list for violent crime rate https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/slideshows/10-most-d...

I have no idea how a person can flip the facts to opposite, but that is the actual real data. 

I mean come on man, San-Fran's most popular app is how to navigate the poop and camps. L.A. is heroin city. Do you really think it's a secret? 

Yeah, I know there is really nice areas but fact is, as a whole, CA is a hot mess. And it ain't those in the rural areas carjacking, drivebuys, rapping and doing armed robbery. 

 What's super interesting about this argument, James, is that Minneapolis is actually much more violent as a city, than San Francisco. San Francisco has a higher property crime rate. 

San Diego, where @Dan H. invests, blows Minneapolis out of the water - it's WAY safer in every category. 

California has it's pockets of high crime areas, but San Diego is not one of them. 

I was comparing large cities to other large cities.   Many states do not have a city as large as los Angeles, dan diego, or san francisco.  It is tough to compare states with no big cities to a state with multiple large cities.  

i have lived in California virtually my entire life and have never been solicited for a bj.   In san diego, you need to seek the sex areas (or be near the bases) to find them.



It was Oceanside.... I was staying at Pendleton. 

@James Wise

 Outside bases, especially on military payday, is one of those places you can find sex providers easily in San Diego area.  They can be assertive/aggressive in obtaining a client.