Burn That Belly
New member
x
Burn That Belly said:qwerty said:The problem with your roi calc is you are doing it on the primary residence. People need a place to live. So if you are not paying interest you would have to pay rent. And 19k for rent is probably too low. So some of your property taxes/HOA, etc need to be allocated to rent. So you are overstating the negative ROI (or understating the ROI)
If it was an investment property, your current math is more accurate.
1. People need a place to live.
True - but they can live with mom and dad like the millennials and centennials.
2. If it was an investment property, your current math is more accurate.
Assume it is, just like empty FCB stucco boxes.
But the 114 Acamar owner could have rented a simple 2 bedroom and kept all the difference in money and invested in the stock market. He'd likely be on top than if he had just flipped so fast.
He could have rented this for $1,900.https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/60-Clearbrook-50-Irvine-CA-92614/25752076_zpid/
12 months in and he'd only spent $22,800 on rent. He wouldn't need to pay property taxes either! That means he would not be out the $31 grand.
aquabliss said:Wow this Eastwood owner must've wanted out real bad: https://www.redfin.com/CA/Irvine/141-Tidal-Line-92602/home/112724666
Bought in Aug 2017 for $841k
Sold in Oct 2017 for $800k
$40k down the tubes + $40k RE commission + closing....
Ouch! At least he didn't landscape the place yet.
aquabliss said:Wow, this is worse than I thought... Second owner of this Eastwood property really got screwed:https://www.redfin.com/CA/Irvine/147-Damsel-92602/home/112724316
Bought in Feb 2018 for $738k
Sold just 2 weeks later for $663k
That's quite a bath to take in a couple weeks, feel bad for that guy.
Thankfully the third owner made $45k when he sold it again 2 weeks later. But after closing cost and RE fees on both transactions... probably didn't fair so well.