3 ms·
SF rent control is profitable for landlords. It resets with each tenant. So, only if you overpay when you initially buy are you ever going to lose money b/c ren
by 001sky 14y ago
SF rent control is profitable for landlords. It resets with each tenant. So, only if you overpay when you initially buy are you ever going to lose money b/c rent control. And if you do that, its a fault of the bid being off.
- tptacek 14y agoI don't follow this. How could it be more profitable for landlords to have a price ceiling?
- 001sky 14y agoIts not that its 'more profitable', it is that it 'is profitable' (enough). And, its not only profitbale enough, but it creates a lock-in (people wont move/give up their space) wich reduces turnover. The ideal position for a landlord is protiable tenants that don't turnover. That's why there is more inertia in the system than seems at first blush to be likely.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- anigbrowl 14y agoThat assumes a high tenant turnover. From what I've seen, the opposite is true. I know people with downtown apartments that have had them since the 80s and only pay a couple of hundred bucks a month. It's difficult to evict someone; for example, if you buy a house that is rented and you want to move in yourself, you either need to wait most of a year or pay up $15,000 to the tenant, depending on their circumstances (if they have dependents who are old people or children in school, for example). If you buy property as an investment and want to evict the current tenants to charge a higher rent, you'd better a) have evidence they're breaking the lease and b) be prepared for a long appeals process.