3 ms·

I assume they’re wanting to avoid rent control laws?

• redis_mlc 6y ago
  1) tenants moving during a pandemic are sketchy 2) there was a federal law that you can't evict during the pandemic. It was struck down last month, but changes can be slow. In Portland, $400 million in residential rent is owed. Doubtful if that will be repaid. 3) If rent went down in rent-controlled areas, then renting now could lock in low rents. 4) What we learned during the 2008 recession, was that banks could outlast the recession and drag their feet on regulatory changes (watch the Senate hearings some time. The bankers just play rope-a-dope, "noncommittal", and I'll-have-to-ask-my-boss for hours and days on end.) Anybody with large amounts of capital can just wait out the market.
• Arnt 6y ago
  As likely as not, they have loans where something is conditional on the rent, e.g. the landlord has to put up additional collateral if the current collateral's value drops, and the value of the collateral is defined as "x times the last three rent payments received".
  • mjevans 6y ago
    First, non-rented months _really_ should count; as zero for that time. Second, it sounds like they're over-leveraged.
    • Arnt 6y ago
      If you assume that the landlord prefers to do repairs/maintenance/improvement between tenants and that that's the most common reason to not let out a property, then not counting that time makes sense. I'm not at all surprised if some landlords are over-leveraged, particularly not now. A lot of people have bled money in the past year.