3 ms·
I want to agree, but at the end of the day the corps doing this are taking crappy properties and renovating them. They want to fix it up and resell it or charge
by hemloc_io 4y ago
I want to agree, but at the end of the day the corps doing this are taking crappy properties and renovating them. They want to fix it up and resell it or charge higher rents than the current owners. That's how they make their profits.
Usually they have a maintenance staff that takes care of the property as well or add additional services.
Mom and pop landlords don't do any of that usually, and just hand someone a key w/ a call to the occasional contractor to fix something instead of an actual company. Most need a warm body to pay off their mortgage so they can sell it in the future and pocket the cash.
We need to fix the supply side, if the corp takes the properties that are broken down and fixes them that's a good thing. The problem comes when people who are around there now cannot afford the new rents they either become homeless or leave.
How far they have to leave depends on the supply of housing in the surrounding area, which b/c of the shortage is pretty low. With a huge supply of housing, it's possible to move next door or down the street and not much changes.
If we build more rents will go down, regardless of who the owners are. Prices to buy homes too for normal people.
Getting people to build more is the problem, high construction costs, zoning/permiting, local opposition etc.
- MrRiddle 4y ago> but at the end of the day the corps doing this are taking crappy properties and renovating them. They want to fix it up and resell it or charge higher rents than the current owners. Could it be the reason that those properties are too expensive for a regular Joe to fix up because of investors in the first place.