All Forum Posts by: Nathan W.

 Do you mind sharing where you pulled your numbers? I've aggregated info from 3 sites and none of them are even close to that bad. 

 I don't disagree. Obviously gauging the interest level will be a due diligence activity. But I interpreted your first post to indicate running test ads before considering an offer. My question was is that even legal? Or does it need to be under contract first?  

 A test ad will definitely be a major part of the due diligence process, both to verify the lot rent as well as the ability to sell off the existing homes owner finance.  You mentioned though "before considering an offer".  Would this be something that you recommend doing before even getting it under contract? Is that even ethical or legal if you do not in fact have a contracted interest in the property?

 Thanks Jack.  I am always trying to be aware of the exit strategy, but what exactly did you mean by your post as it was rather vague? I assume the exit is just like it is for any commercial property--if it is a good deal, someone will buy it from you later down the line if you decide you want to sell.  Otherwise it hopefully produces cash flow to meet your financial needs in the meantime.  

What specifically do you recommend for remembering the exit? And what is it about the property that makes you think that "no one is wanting to buy"?

 Wow thanks for the thorough post.  Everything you are saying checks to chart with what I had, and hadn't, been thinking in my line of thought as well.  I'm not sure that I have the time right now to dedicate a lot more than 5-10 hours/week, especially being out of state.  This would definitely be a long term process, which I am not terribly dismissive of since the park currently produces income even in its high expense/high POH form.  

Your math shows what mine did as well--that they are basically giving the homes away and selling with just the lot rent carrying the asking price.  

They had mentioned that around 10 of them are total teardowns, so my first order of business would be to get them off the lot so they are no longer "attractive nuisances" and potentially look at the Century 21 program for getting new homes on that I have seen discussed a couple of times in this forum.  

I have personal lines of credit I wouldn't mind deploying to begin fixing up the vacant homes, but probably wouldn't begin this phase immediately as I would focus more on getting rid of the really bad ones and then getting tenant buyers into the ones that are occupied.  

I really like the potential here, as I see the huge possible upside and if I can carry a profit in the meantime while I get to work, this has the possibility to let me incrementally improve.    

 You are right, of course.  It is a bit more involved than I had though.  I've read some of the news reports over the past few hours on how the mayor is trying to get all the service lines replaced within the year (it is my understanding that most, if not all, of the main lines were cast iron and thus not affected).  Appreciate the clarification.  This is tricky indeed....

Hi All, I have been lurking this subforum for a while now and am ready to start pursuing my own deals.  I need to be careful with the details on this one, as I signed a C/A so as such I will ONLY be posting info presented on the publicly available flyer.

Details are:

City: Flint, MI (it is on Detroit water, not the hosed up Flint system)

Water/Sewer are municipal

Pads: 87 (weird layout of existing homes make the usable pad rate only 85)

Park owned homes: 85 (40 or so vacant--it seems this has improved since last year, maybe)

Average Lot Rent: $285/month

Roads: Asphalt

Asking Price: $525k

2013-2015 reported income (per flyer): $212k, $190k, $206k

Notwithstanding the obvious math discrepancies of 45*285*12 = $154k (far off the reported income), the really interesting part is the reported expenses for those years at $171k (81%), $166k (87%), and $149k (72%), respectively.

So it is obvious that the management leaves a lot to be desired if the actual operating expenses could be cut down to the 30-40% nominal.  Master metered utilities obviously, which could probably be submetered for a quick return, but what else is going on here that could possibly explain why the expenses are so high?  The flyer shows high maintenance and service costs, and it appears the homes (as they are park owned) may be rented for the equivalent lot rent.  

It seems to me there is a huge upside here by selling off the homes that currently have people living in them, demoing the 10 or so that are completely trashed, renovating the others and selller financing them as well, and increasing the occupancy from its current 50%.  Not to mention drastically slashing the expenses by sub metering and removing the maintenance expenses since the homes would no longer be parked owned.

What is it I am missing here? Are these sellers just completely out to lunch or am I?

So this feature you guys have been touting for months is the new premium feature (meaning pay to play), correct? If so, I really see no reason to go with you guys over your competitors (especially E Rent Payment) who meet that timeline as their baseline (albeit with a $3 fee).  

I have only two rentals but have been using E Rent Payment for 2 years now on both of them and have not had a single problem with rents not arriving on time.  I have NEVER had one arrive after the 5th of the month, and mostly on the 4th when the tenant schedules the payment on the 1st due date.  

I gotta say I was drawn to Cozy over the smooth interface, application options, and some of the built-in features (E Rent Payment is very clunky) but am not sure I will stick with it long term due to the payment issue.  I also found the application process, while smooth and intuitive to be an extremely un-robust solution.  I was forced to use the same questions and phrasing that you guys came up with, as opposed to my own.  Your competitors are putting this functionality into their systems now and while you have the competitive edge in actual design, your functionality does not seem up to snuff.

Plus that processing time....

 As I've explained numerous times in this thread, this was a generalized question to a specific question about financing.  It was not about the validity of the deal itself.  LIke I said, if I wanted that advice I would have posted in the ANALYZE THIS DEAL subforum with a HEY GUYS WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THIS DEAL? headline.  I didn't.  Most people were able to pick up on that, some weren't.

If you had bothered to read the last few posts, the majority of us have gotten past the air that you so desperately sought to clear.  But yes random internet stranger, I appreciate you taking time to not mind your own business to tell someone else how to act, when that person neither requested, required, nor desired that help.  Especially in the face of trollish behavior.  

There are mods that clean up trollish/abusive posts, as they have done multiple times in this thread to the member you seem to hold in such high regard.  There is a PM function if you truly wanted to give me advice on how to make friends and influence people, without making a spectacle of it in a public post.  Instead you chose to attempt public shaming, for whatever reason.  That's cool.  Maybe you needed the forum votes from the other trollish posters here? I  hope you feel like your time was well spent.

 haha that is awesome man! I'm not actually worried about it, despite the well meaning advice that I maybe ought to be received here.  It was essentially to make sure I had covered my bases and that I wasn't missing anything on the financing side that other people may notice.  I thought that synergy would be beneficial, and I am still trying to decide if it was but am feeling much better about it over the past couple hours.  

I also think this could help someone out in the future, who may have the same type of questions, so that they can read a meaningful debate on the idea.  So here were are.

Yeah you're right the accelerated paydown was essentially just so I can keep doing the same thing. Since the math shows it is cheaper and/or quicker to "save up a down payment" (ore more specifically, its funding equivalent) via the HELOC route, I wanted to ensure this was a valid option.

Have you acquired a few properties doing this?