granted for buildings of 50 or greater units.
I actually disagree with the title of the article. the lede is buried pretty far down but rents are up 1-2% YoY. Since that’s below the rate of inflation, not something I would call a jump.
Condos are the last to appreciate and the first to fall in a down turn…Rentals are flat, that usually menas condos shouldn’t appreciate. .But they still are…
I have been saying this for a year or two now. The Case Schiller data clearly shows condos appreciate faster than SFH’s. People who claim otherwise are just saying this out of their personal beliefs with no support from data.
The trulia guys give one good reason why it’s so. Condos, especially the recently built ones are close to the center of action. I would add that in many super metros like SF decent SFHs are increasingly out of reach. Condos are second best substitutes.
If you want to see the future look at places like Hong Kong. Only the super wealthy can afford SFHs and their value are like that of Picasso paintings. Condos are what 99% of people buy and appreciation outpaces SFHs by miles.
New condos are likely to appreciate faster because of far better construction and amenities than old condos.
Look, I just have a preference for residences that (a) I can modify to my heart’s content without some association up my butt and (b) is void of any extra monthly expenses that I can’t control regardless of my usage. Nowhere in there suggests condos couldn’t appreciate more than SFHs, although I find that very hard to believe when we know more and more condos are rolling off the line while SFHs, not so much at all. At the end of the day, go with the law of supply and demand I say. Whenever possible, why not swim in the pool of the privileged as opposed to the masses??? Let’s aspire to be more. SFHs, at least here, are still within reach so why not buy that instead of condos? All I know is I do not recall a single story/report where a normal, typical SFH, held for a number of years, did not appreciate quite well. On the flip side, I can find you plenty of condo purchase stories where the seller ended up losing money.
Past = old condo.
Future = condo built since 2000.
I don’t see any SFH in San Francisco that can cash flow neutral on 25% down. I like SFH and will buy SFH for personal use even at a lower rate of appreciation. That’s purely personal preference and should be separate from business dollars and cents consideration.
I think it was the late 90’s when fire code changed. Newer condos must have drywall, insulation, wood, and an air gap between units. It got rid one of the biggest complaints of being able to hear the neighbors. Condos before that are pretty terrible and lack a noise barriers.
Well, that’s why many investors then head towards multi units but then again you don’t like that because of rent control. Can’t have everything. The way the ballgame is headed, rent control will be everywhere someday and then what will be your next move? The condo market just never interested me. I don’t like the shared risk, the rules and regulations.
Sell. Sell everything. Hopefully by then I will be like @wuqijun and have 10+M under my name.
Rent control will only dominate places like the bay area that are NIMBY to the extreme. There will be plenty of places to be a profitable landlord.
The biggest con of condo is HOA.
The biggest pro of a SFH is the LAND.
Please stop speculating my assets… I already said I’m not the 1%…
Top 1% net worth is $7M. Are you sure?
Anyway, the gap between 1% and 0.1% is huge.
Wage earner’s best reach is 1%. You need to be a CEO to get to 0.1%. Is Manch the only CEO here? Maybe wuqijun can register a corporation and become a CEO to march toward 0.1%
“The top 0.01 percent are stock-market winners—CEOs, bankers, entrepreneurs—who are riding financial markets to outsize gains. The rest of the top 1 percent are often mere wage earners.”
I do have an LLC. Does that count? I’m the stakeholder, manager, and employee of that LLC all rolled into one…
Net Worth in the United States: Zooming in on the Top Centiles dated Jul 2, 2017. I presume net worth here includes homestead.
Top 0.1%, net worth => $30,644,280.00
Top 1.0%, net worth => $7,869,549.00
Top 5.0%, net worth => $1,868,640.00 (Those staying in SF or SV should be here)
Top 10.0%, net worth => $943,656.00 (Those staying in Bay Area should be here)
Any data on networth distribution in BA? Maybe top 5% of BA people can reach $7M. I do not think 10% of BA can reach national top 1% networth
I suspect that BA has many top 10% household wealth, but average top 1%, and super sized top 0.1%. It’s a hollow middle again
And what percentage of landlord can get to 1%?
I do have data. I will share when I get a chance.