Payam Raouf
President
Arizona Property Management and Investments
888-777-6664 ext 111
March madness was here folks. It felt like 2004 and 2005 again. Investors were back with a vengeance buying up the entire valley IN CASH! Where did all that money suddenly come from?
Multiple offers were as common as sleeping in a sleeping bag behind a builder’s sales office to get the first releases 7 years ago but this time investors had cash and plenty of that too.
I don’t want to spoil it for my own clients by telling everyone out there what we are buying, as an investor told me last week in a phone conversation, “I read what is going to happen in you blog 9 months ago and it is happening now”. That maybe a little exaggeration, I wish I had such a crystal ball but the truth is we are in the tranches on the front line day in, day out; we have a good idea where the market is headed. Going through all the ups and downs in the past few years and have been involved in over 1000 transactions helps though.
Here we go, I cannot hold it. Let’s spread the wealth! 70% of the buying in Arizona is done by foreign investors!!! They are buying everything at trustee sales, bank owned, short sales and whatever makes some sense! These are very savvy investors. Conservative to some point but are willing to look at opportunities for longer term as well. Cash flow is the name, appreciation is the game.
I see more investors are moving in towards Peoria, Happy Valley, Arrow Head, and west wing Mountain taking all the good stuff betting against each other, taking the market up 5% to 10%!
Surprise, some parts of Glendale, Avondale are already played out. El Mirage, Buckeye, Tolesson, not getting much play at all. Laveen and Goodyear are getting back on the map. Litchfield park is still getting some actions.
Gilbert is on, Chandler on the side line, Mesa and Tempe, ummm. May not be too late to get into Maricopa, there may be still some deals out there, you have got to watch out where you buy out there. Queen Creek, San Tan Valley, Gold Canyon not even a prayer, dead as a door nail, don’t get stucked down there. You will be there a while.
We feel very confident that this frenzy will continue for a good while and as the result prices will continue to go up in some areas. We bought a property 14 months ago for one of our investors in Peoria for 220K and I just looked it up, it sells for 310K in today's market!! We were encouraging investors to buy there 14 months ago!
We also are expecting to see some good deals in Scottsdale area in the future, give it another six to eight months, November, December, before entering that market.
For right now folks, stick with the 3 real estate basics, Location, Location, Location.
It would not be fair to our clients to pin point exactly what pockets we are buying at this time however if you are seriously considering utilizing our expertise, please give me a call directly at 888-777-6664 ext 111. I have several associates out there in the field every day previewing properties for our steady investors. We can put you on our nightly recommended property list as well, if you would like us help you buy investment properties (our nitch) as well.
If you are currently in escrow and would like to take advantage of our “A’ Rating property management services, call Rhonda Urtuzuastegui, my Portfolio Manager at ext 109. We have a full staff to attend to your business including property prep, reconditioning and rehab services.
Just click on yahoo investment blog and saw this,"Russian billionaire buys $100M Silicon Valley home". He should have called us. We could have saved him some money. LOL
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Friday, March 25, 2011
Arizona Rental/Investment Market Update as of 3/25/2011
Payam Raouf
President/Associate Broker
Arizona property Management and Investments
Arizona Rental/Investment Market Update as of 3/25/2011
Total Homes for sale on MLS: 38185 Active, AWC-Contingent Offers, AWC-Existing Option to Purchase, AWC-Seller Written Instructions
14582 pre approved short sale, pre-Foreclosure or short sale approval required in Active, AWC-Contingent Offers, AWC-Existing Option to Purchase, AWC-Seller Written Instructions
5239 Active foreclosed properties for sale ( less than 10% make sense to invest in )
Only 2135 unfurnished rental homes with 3 bed rooms or more Valley Wide, i.e. the entire Phoenix Metropolitan Area!
If this does not call for a panic, what does? There are 4 applicants per house as we speak. Rents have gone up 25% since 2009, most of it just in the last 6 months! Should this trend continue once these homes are foreclosed on, where should renters set their tenants up?
Cash buyers, investors have flooded the market. There are 2 to 3 offers on decent properties in good locations. Prices as the result are going up. Cash offers are coming in at 5% above asking prices. We have never received so many calls from cash buyers. When ask why, everyone almost says the same thing, hedging against dollar devaluation and cash flow and boy are they getting it. We used to calculate 1% of purchase price as a gauge for rent, giving investors 6 to 7 percent net return. Now a day, with the rents going up through the roof, that is moving up to 8 to 9 percent.
I just read in Arizona Republic yesterday, there are so many investors wanting to buy homes here that HUD is not accepting investors in the upcoming Auction.
Of course, bear in mind that is not on everything you buy out here. You have got to know, what and where to buy and what it rent for. That’s what we do. If you need additional information give us a call. 888-777-6664 ext 111. Payam Raouf
President/Associate Broker
Arizona property Management and Investments
Arizona Rental/Investment Market Update as of 3/25/2011
Total Homes for sale on MLS: 38185 Active, AWC-Contingent Offers, AWC-Existing Option to Purchase, AWC-Seller Written Instructions
14582 pre approved short sale, pre-Foreclosure or short sale approval required in Active, AWC-Contingent Offers, AWC-Existing Option to Purchase, AWC-Seller Written Instructions
5239 Active foreclosed properties for sale ( less than 10% make sense to invest in )
Only 2135 unfurnished rental homes with 3 bed rooms or more Valley Wide, i.e. the entire Phoenix Metropolitan Area!
If this does not call for a panic, what does? There are 4 applicants per house as we speak. Rents have gone up 25% since 2009, most of it just in the last 6 months! Should this trend continue once these homes are foreclosed on, where should renters set their tenants up?
Cash buyers, investors have flooded the market. There are 2 to 3 offers on decent properties in good locations. Prices as the result are going up. Cash offers are coming in at 5% above asking prices. We have never received so many calls from cash buyers. When ask why, everyone almost says the same thing, hedging against dollar devaluation and cash flow and boy are they getting it. We used to calculate 1% of purchase price as a gauge for rent, giving investors 6 to 7 percent net return. Now a day, with the rents going up through the roof, that is moving up to 8 to 9 percent.
I just read in Arizona Republic yesterday, there are so many investors wanting to buy homes here that HUD is not accepting investors in the upcoming Auction.
Of course, bear in mind that is not on everything you buy out here. You have got to know, what and where to buy and what it rent for. That’s what we do. If you need additional information give us a call. 888-777-6664 ext 111. Payam Raouf
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Arizona legislation to help homeowners under water.
Catherine Reagor
Arizona Republic
March 16 2011
Arizona legislation to help homeowners under water
Some Arizona homeowners under water on their mortgages might be able to reduce their interest rates and monthly payments if a proposed state program becomes law.
The "home certificate" program laid out in a new bill is intended to help homeowners lower their mortgage payments even if they can't refinance their mortgages through a traditional bank.
The proposal is both unprecedented and controversial. Essentially, it would create a separate market for mortgage financing from private investors, bypassing banks. Investors could benefit by earning interest paid by reliable borrowers, while homeowners could benefit from lower monthly payments and lower interest rates than they currently have.
Although the plan's backer says it could help many homeowners, critics say lenders will be reluctant to agree to the system.
Roadblocks
The program, which is intended to be short-term, might also put borrowers at risk and won't work if home values don't rebound enough for borrowers to refinance later, letting investors get back the money they put in.
Since the crash in home values, many Valley residents now owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth. In that situation, they typically can't qualify to refinance. Their homes aren't worth enough for lenders to issue them a new mortgage at a lower interest rate.
That situation leaves homeowners, even those with good credit who can make their payments, unable to take advantage of lower interest rates.
Those are the homeowners the bill aims to help.
The legislation, backed by Scottsdale Republican Sen. Michelle Reagan, has passed the Senate and has been assigned to be heard in the House Commerce Committee, but that hearing is not yet scheduled.
Reagan said she believes the bill can help responsible homeowners unable to refinance to current low interest rates and set up a system for investors to make money.
"It's a private program that is based on free-market principles," Reagan said.
How it works
The system would work this way:
- Arizona homeowners would qualify if they were current on their mortgage payments but owed more than their houses were worth.
- Qualifying homeowners would enter a marketplace managed by a state agency that has not yet been designated. They would publicly post the monthly payment they were willing to make - typically a payment lower than their current bill and equivalent to their current mortgage but with an interest rate of 2 to 5 percent.
- Investors would evaluate those mortgage requests and then bid on the loans they wanted to buy.
- When investors and borrowers were matched up, the investors would pay off the homeowners' old loans. Homeowners then could make payments, at a lower interest rate, to the investors. Investors would make 2 to 5 percent interest, which Reagan noted is more than they can currently earn by saving cash in a bank.
- Borrowers would have to sign away their "anti-deficiency" rights. Laws in Arizona say banks in most cases cannot pursue homeowners to recoup any losses after foreclosing on a home. Waiving anti-deficiency rights is meant to reassure investors that borrowers wouldn't abandon their homes without repaying.
- Investors would receive a home certificate giving them lender rights to the house as collateral for the short-term loan. Each month, 3 percent of a homeowner's payment would go into an insurance fund that would help cover potential losses for investors. The fund would be managed by a government agency.
The system would make the deals temporary. After five to 10 years, homeowners would have to pay back investors' principal. The bill anticipates that, by then, home values will have rebounded, allowing borrowers to refinance through a traditional home lender.
Problems
The idea is stirring controversy. The bill is difficult to understand; the plan has never been tried before and the system would require changes to current Arizona real-estate laws and property records.
"The legislation sounds similar to how people bid on tax liens in Arizona, but the bill is very vague and hard to figure out," said Jay Butler, director of realty studies at Arizona State University. "Also, who says lenders are going to agree to it?"
That issue is key to the program. Once a private investor agrees to take over a mortgage, the original lender has to agree to the deal.
Typically, a homeowner is allowed to pay off the balance of a loan at any time. But, in this case, the homeowner is not the one paying off the loan. A third-party investor provides the cash and then that investor, not the bank, profits off the borrower's payments.
In essence, the banks would have to agree to give up their future profits to OK the deals.
Other questions remain: Would enough investors be willing to participate in the program, given that the homes are worth less than the value of the loans? Would homeowners who have signed over their anti-deficiency rights but who later lose their jobs and their homes end up also being sued by investors?
"The program has noble intentions," said Marc McCain, a Phoenix real-estate attorney, "but without widespread lender . . . support and participation, it is not likely to provide much practical benefit."
Reagan is addressing the lender issue with plans to add an amendment calling for "deemed foreclosures" in Arizona.
The move appears to be intended to force banks to give up the mortgages. But specifics on how it would work are not yet clear.
Reagan said it would help ensure that lenders must sell mortgages to investors.
"Any term with foreclosure is scary to homeowners, but deemed foreclosures will not hurt their credit," Reagan said.
Prospects
Last week, Reagan met with Gov. Jan Brewer's office to discuss the legislation and what agency could handle the insurance fund.
Ira Hecht, a New York attorney and accountant who crafted the idea behind the bill, participated in one of the meetings via conference call.
Reagan said Hecht approached her about launching the program in Arizona because many homeowners in the state are still making their payments despite a huge drop in home values.
Reagan is proposing to run the insurance part of the program through the Arizona Housing Authority, which is part of the state's Housing Department.
Mike Trailor, director of the Housing Department, said his agency is asking questions about the proposed program. The finance division of the Housing Department can issue bonds and provide other financial instruments potentially needed for the program.
Rep. Debbie McCune Davis, D-Phoenix, said legislation to help homeowners avoid foreclosures, instead of refinancing a loan they can afford, should be a bigger concern for the Legislature.
Arizona banking lobbyist Wendy Briggs said the banking industry is "neutral" on the legislation.
"This is a completely voluntary program for homeowners and investors," Reagan said. "If people don't like the terms, they don't have to participate. But, for so many of us underwater on our mortgages, it's our only option to take advantage of the current low interest rates."
Arizona Republic
March 16 2011
Arizona legislation to help homeowners under water
Some Arizona homeowners under water on their mortgages might be able to reduce their interest rates and monthly payments if a proposed state program becomes law.
The "home certificate" program laid out in a new bill is intended to help homeowners lower their mortgage payments even if they can't refinance their mortgages through a traditional bank.
The proposal is both unprecedented and controversial. Essentially, it would create a separate market for mortgage financing from private investors, bypassing banks. Investors could benefit by earning interest paid by reliable borrowers, while homeowners could benefit from lower monthly payments and lower interest rates than they currently have.
Although the plan's backer says it could help many homeowners, critics say lenders will be reluctant to agree to the system.
Roadblocks
The program, which is intended to be short-term, might also put borrowers at risk and won't work if home values don't rebound enough for borrowers to refinance later, letting investors get back the money they put in.
Since the crash in home values, many Valley residents now owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth. In that situation, they typically can't qualify to refinance. Their homes aren't worth enough for lenders to issue them a new mortgage at a lower interest rate.
That situation leaves homeowners, even those with good credit who can make their payments, unable to take advantage of lower interest rates.
Those are the homeowners the bill aims to help.
The legislation, backed by Scottsdale Republican Sen. Michelle Reagan, has passed the Senate and has been assigned to be heard in the House Commerce Committee, but that hearing is not yet scheduled.
Reagan said she believes the bill can help responsible homeowners unable to refinance to current low interest rates and set up a system for investors to make money.
"It's a private program that is based on free-market principles," Reagan said.
How it works
The system would work this way:
- Arizona homeowners would qualify if they were current on their mortgage payments but owed more than their houses were worth.
- Qualifying homeowners would enter a marketplace managed by a state agency that has not yet been designated. They would publicly post the monthly payment they were willing to make - typically a payment lower than their current bill and equivalent to their current mortgage but with an interest rate of 2 to 5 percent.
- Investors would evaluate those mortgage requests and then bid on the loans they wanted to buy.
- When investors and borrowers were matched up, the investors would pay off the homeowners' old loans. Homeowners then could make payments, at a lower interest rate, to the investors. Investors would make 2 to 5 percent interest, which Reagan noted is more than they can currently earn by saving cash in a bank.
- Borrowers would have to sign away their "anti-deficiency" rights. Laws in Arizona say banks in most cases cannot pursue homeowners to recoup any losses after foreclosing on a home. Waiving anti-deficiency rights is meant to reassure investors that borrowers wouldn't abandon their homes without repaying.
- Investors would receive a home certificate giving them lender rights to the house as collateral for the short-term loan. Each month, 3 percent of a homeowner's payment would go into an insurance fund that would help cover potential losses for investors. The fund would be managed by a government agency.
The system would make the deals temporary. After five to 10 years, homeowners would have to pay back investors' principal. The bill anticipates that, by then, home values will have rebounded, allowing borrowers to refinance through a traditional home lender.
Problems
The idea is stirring controversy. The bill is difficult to understand; the plan has never been tried before and the system would require changes to current Arizona real-estate laws and property records.
"The legislation sounds similar to how people bid on tax liens in Arizona, but the bill is very vague and hard to figure out," said Jay Butler, director of realty studies at Arizona State University. "Also, who says lenders are going to agree to it?"
That issue is key to the program. Once a private investor agrees to take over a mortgage, the original lender has to agree to the deal.
Typically, a homeowner is allowed to pay off the balance of a loan at any time. But, in this case, the homeowner is not the one paying off the loan. A third-party investor provides the cash and then that investor, not the bank, profits off the borrower's payments.
In essence, the banks would have to agree to give up their future profits to OK the deals.
Other questions remain: Would enough investors be willing to participate in the program, given that the homes are worth less than the value of the loans? Would homeowners who have signed over their anti-deficiency rights but who later lose their jobs and their homes end up also being sued by investors?
"The program has noble intentions," said Marc McCain, a Phoenix real-estate attorney, "but without widespread lender . . . support and participation, it is not likely to provide much practical benefit."
Reagan is addressing the lender issue with plans to add an amendment calling for "deemed foreclosures" in Arizona.
The move appears to be intended to force banks to give up the mortgages. But specifics on how it would work are not yet clear.
Reagan said it would help ensure that lenders must sell mortgages to investors.
"Any term with foreclosure is scary to homeowners, but deemed foreclosures will not hurt their credit," Reagan said.
Prospects
Last week, Reagan met with Gov. Jan Brewer's office to discuss the legislation and what agency could handle the insurance fund.
Ira Hecht, a New York attorney and accountant who crafted the idea behind the bill, participated in one of the meetings via conference call.
Reagan said Hecht approached her about launching the program in Arizona because many homeowners in the state are still making their payments despite a huge drop in home values.
Reagan is proposing to run the insurance part of the program through the Arizona Housing Authority, which is part of the state's Housing Department.
Mike Trailor, director of the Housing Department, said his agency is asking questions about the proposed program. The finance division of the Housing Department can issue bonds and provide other financial instruments potentially needed for the program.
Rep. Debbie McCune Davis, D-Phoenix, said legislation to help homeowners avoid foreclosures, instead of refinancing a loan they can afford, should be a bigger concern for the Legislature.
Arizona banking lobbyist Wendy Briggs said the banking industry is "neutral" on the legislation.
"This is a completely voluntary program for homeowners and investors," Reagan said. "If people don't like the terms, they don't have to participate. But, for so many of us underwater on our mortgages, it's our only option to take advantage of the current low interest rates."
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
There is a crisis brewing in the rental market in Phoenix Metro.
Payam Raouf
President
Arizona property Management and Investments
888-777-6664 ext 111
info@azezrentals.com
There is a crisis brewing in the rental market in Phoenix Metro. There seems to be 4 applicants for every rental home out there on mls. Our phones are ringing off the hooks like never before. It prompted me to check the inventory on mls and there you go, as of today March 8th 2011, there are 18,644 active, active with contingency and pending short sale and pre-foreclosure homes on mls and only 2547 single family rental home listings with three bed rooms or more.
Many home owners in the process of short sale or foreclosure are starting to look for a rental property already. They don't care what the bank wants to do with their home any more because, a) they want to move on with their lives, b) they want to get what they want and don't want to settle for ANY rental home, c) They can not afford any higher rent.
Many of them have pets. Most owners of rental homes do not accept large dogs and specially cats. A prospective rental applicant who has three pit bulls told me yesterday, he can give two away and is looking for a shelter to accept the third. No wonder I see so many ads from animal shelters lately!
Banks are refusing to foreclose on these properties. We’ve entered a new era in global financial markets where the U.S. is intentionally devaluing the dollar. With that in mind it is disadvantageous for financial institutions to foreclose on these properties anytime soon. They will benefit from riding it out in several ways, a) they don't have to write it off their books right now upsetting their shareholders, b) they don't have to pay the taxes and HOA fees and insurance, c) they have home keepers (current owners) taking care of their homes instead of leaving it empty - most insurance companies will not insure an unoccupied property - d) make a ton of money when the dollar is devaluated over the years, estimated time maybe within 5 years, yet holding the owners feet to the fire to pay up the unpaid mortgages in addition to the balance of the loan in case the dollar devaluates so far as to produce value in excess of the loan amount.
I saw on the news "3 on your side" last night, this home owner begging the bank for foreclose on hers. She moved out a year ago and the bank still has not foreclose on her house. In this case, they may go ahead and do it soon because it is too costly -vandalism - for it to sit empty.
The shortness in the rental market is already driving the rents up. Specially homes in the $1500 to $2000. We see a lot affluent people wanting to rent now. $3000 rentals move even faster!!!!
There is less than 5782 foreclosures in the market, 3/4 of them don't meet today's savvy investors criteria to buy. Fannie Mae does not sell to investors for the first 15 days, so all the good homes are gone before they get a chance to buy. 2/3 of the short sales are not closing like they used to. Banks would rather foreclose on them because they make more money in the process and they are not even doing that because they don't have the reserve to cover their losses.
It is going to get really ugly soon with the summer around the corner and more families wanting to move. Banks need to come up with a solution soon. Maybe they can lease these homes back to the owners with a 5 or 10 year option to buy - doubt they will or can. On the other hand, private investors can get in on this and really made some serious dough if they are smart. They are many ways to do it. State of Arizona is working with some private investors to help some upside down homeowners to stay put and in the process both the state and private investors reaping the benefits.
There is another way to get on this and that is through a) buying real estate for your own individual portfolio or if you don't have enough to buy the right product, put your money into a pool with others (make sure you get on the deed), b)if you don't want to deal with managing your portfolio yourself, do your due diligence and buy shares in a holding that invests in such ventures to get a reasonable dividend ( 6 to 7 percent ) in short run and hedge your money against hyperinflation as the result of dollar devaluation in the long run.
I have heard it all, buy gold, silver, copper,other commodities etc. OK, gold reaches $5000 an ounce, who is going to NEED it to buy it at that? Real estate on the other hand, a tangible asset is NEEDED AT ALL TIMES, people need roof over their heads and there you go. If you have any common sense, you will pile up on your real estate portfolio in Arizona and Nevada right now --- Even though, prices are going up on good inventory in desirable areas ( location, location, location)and there is a shortage due to bank keeping them for themselves, you can still steal some at 30 to 40 percent below builders original cost --- and retire on it and leave some to your kids.
If you are an investor wanting to buy rental investment properties in Phoenix Metro Area, we do it all, please give me, Payam Raouf a call at 888-777-6664 ext 111 or info@azezrentals.com. Time is of the Essence. We are on top of the market and can give you the kind of input needed to fill up your pockets with a lots of treasures.
Remember, The Richest Man in Babylon, the book by George Samuel Clason which says, ...Seek wise counsel....Let their wisdom protect thy treasure from unsafe investments.
President
Arizona property Management and Investments
888-777-6664 ext 111
info@azezrentals.com
There is a crisis brewing in the rental market in Phoenix Metro. There seems to be 4 applicants for every rental home out there on mls. Our phones are ringing off the hooks like never before. It prompted me to check the inventory on mls and there you go, as of today March 8th 2011, there are 18,644 active, active with contingency and pending short sale and pre-foreclosure homes on mls and only 2547 single family rental home listings with three bed rooms or more.
Many home owners in the process of short sale or foreclosure are starting to look for a rental property already. They don't care what the bank wants to do with their home any more because, a) they want to move on with their lives, b) they want to get what they want and don't want to settle for ANY rental home, c) They can not afford any higher rent.
Many of them have pets. Most owners of rental homes do not accept large dogs and specially cats. A prospective rental applicant who has three pit bulls told me yesterday, he can give two away and is looking for a shelter to accept the third. No wonder I see so many ads from animal shelters lately!
Banks are refusing to foreclose on these properties. We’ve entered a new era in global financial markets where the U.S. is intentionally devaluing the dollar. With that in mind it is disadvantageous for financial institutions to foreclose on these properties anytime soon. They will benefit from riding it out in several ways, a) they don't have to write it off their books right now upsetting their shareholders, b) they don't have to pay the taxes and HOA fees and insurance, c) they have home keepers (current owners) taking care of their homes instead of leaving it empty - most insurance companies will not insure an unoccupied property - d) make a ton of money when the dollar is devaluated over the years, estimated time maybe within 5 years, yet holding the owners feet to the fire to pay up the unpaid mortgages in addition to the balance of the loan in case the dollar devaluates so far as to produce value in excess of the loan amount.
I saw on the news "3 on your side" last night, this home owner begging the bank for foreclose on hers. She moved out a year ago and the bank still has not foreclose on her house. In this case, they may go ahead and do it soon because it is too costly -vandalism - for it to sit empty.
The shortness in the rental market is already driving the rents up. Specially homes in the $1500 to $2000. We see a lot affluent people wanting to rent now. $3000 rentals move even faster!!!!
There is less than 5782 foreclosures in the market, 3/4 of them don't meet today's savvy investors criteria to buy. Fannie Mae does not sell to investors for the first 15 days, so all the good homes are gone before they get a chance to buy. 2/3 of the short sales are not closing like they used to. Banks would rather foreclose on them because they make more money in the process and they are not even doing that because they don't have the reserve to cover their losses.
It is going to get really ugly soon with the summer around the corner and more families wanting to move. Banks need to come up with a solution soon. Maybe they can lease these homes back to the owners with a 5 or 10 year option to buy - doubt they will or can. On the other hand, private investors can get in on this and really made some serious dough if they are smart. They are many ways to do it. State of Arizona is working with some private investors to help some upside down homeowners to stay put and in the process both the state and private investors reaping the benefits.
There is another way to get on this and that is through a) buying real estate for your own individual portfolio or if you don't have enough to buy the right product, put your money into a pool with others (make sure you get on the deed), b)if you don't want to deal with managing your portfolio yourself, do your due diligence and buy shares in a holding that invests in such ventures to get a reasonable dividend ( 6 to 7 percent ) in short run and hedge your money against hyperinflation as the result of dollar devaluation in the long run.
I have heard it all, buy gold, silver, copper,other commodities etc. OK, gold reaches $5000 an ounce, who is going to NEED it to buy it at that? Real estate on the other hand, a tangible asset is NEEDED AT ALL TIMES, people need roof over their heads and there you go. If you have any common sense, you will pile up on your real estate portfolio in Arizona and Nevada right now --- Even though, prices are going up on good inventory in desirable areas ( location, location, location)and there is a shortage due to bank keeping them for themselves, you can still steal some at 30 to 40 percent below builders original cost --- and retire on it and leave some to your kids.
If you are an investor wanting to buy rental investment properties in Phoenix Metro Area, we do it all, please give me, Payam Raouf a call at 888-777-6664 ext 111 or info@azezrentals.com. Time is of the Essence. We are on top of the market and can give you the kind of input needed to fill up your pockets with a lots of treasures.
Remember, The Richest Man in Babylon, the book by George Samuel Clason which says, ...Seek wise counsel....Let their wisdom protect thy treasure from unsafe investments.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Why 2011 May Be the End of the Housing Crash
Please Contact Payam Raouf at 888-777-6664 ext 111 to purchase investment properties in Phoenix Metro Area.
Why 2011 May Be the End of the Housing Crash
by Simon Constable
Monday, February 28, 2011
The Wall Street Journal
There might finally be some good news this year about the nation's dismal housing market. Or, at least, the bad news could stop.
Either way, it will be welcome relief for current homeowners as well as for potential real-estate investors. Reasons to be optimistic have been sadly lacking since the housing bubble burst in 2006.
For sure, last week we learned the widely watched S&P/Case-Shiller home-price index fell 1% in December, its fifth straight decline. The index tracks 20 major markets.
But that figure belies real reasons to be optimistic, according to some experts. If they are right, it might make sense to jump into real estate. The trick is avoiding getting burned again, and it doesn't necessarily mean owning a home.
First, let's recap the economic signs a bottom is close.
Houses Are a Good Deal
Housing is the most affordable it has been in decades, according to analysts at Moody's Analytics. They don't just look at house prices. They also look at incomes.
Nationally, the cost of a house is the equivalent of about 19 months of total pay for an average family, the lowest level in 35 years. Prices usually average close to two years' pay, although that varies nationally.
At the peak, midway through the last decade, a home in Los Angeles cost the equivalent of 4.5 years' pay. The average price has since fallen to just over two years' income now. That's well below its pre-bubble average of 2.6 years. This means average Los Angeles homes are cheaper in "real terms" than they were typically during the period 1989 through 2003.
The opposite is true around the Washington beltway, where it will take 26 months of pay to buy a home, versus the historical norm of 22 months.
In the end, it will be affordability that will drive people to buy homes.
"Pricing is down so much in some markets that when you analyze renting versus owning it makes much more sense to own," says Michael Larson, a real-estate analyst at Weiss Research in Jupiter, Fla.
It is definitely bullish. But what about timing?
"Housing prices will probably bottom in 2011," says Scott Simon, a managing director at money-management firm Pimco in Newport Beach, Calif. He foresaw the housing crash, helping his firm dodge losses that plagued Wall Street.
Mr. Simon says prices might dip another 5%. Still, in the scheme of things, that's small. Consider this: In some markets, home prices have fallen by half or more since 2006.
For instance, in once-hot Miami you can snap up an average house for under $166,000, according to recent data from the National Association of Realtors. That's down from $371,000 in 2006. Another 5% drop would take it to $158,000.
Investors Stepping Up
Here's another sign the market is nearing a bottom: Investors have started to buy up houses and condos, in some instances paying entirely in cash. That's a far cry from the heady bubble days when borrowed money seemed the key to riches. The bubble-era speculators who got burned tended to buy at the peak and borrowed heavily to do so. When the crash came, they quickly saw their wealth erased.
Take Miami again. Last year, more than half of all transactions were made entirely in cash, according to a recent report in The Wall Street Journal. That compares with 13% of deals in the last quarter of 2006, the height of the bubble. Similarly, in Phoenix 42% of sales in 2010 went to all-cash buyers, up threefold since 2008.
It's a sign that these investors are betting on a rebound. Investors buying at current prices are looking for deals, or so-called bottom fishing. They typically like to pay entirely in cash (or with a relatively small loan) to speed up transactions. That can be vital for an investor wishing to lock in a deal fast.
If this is a turn in the market, then it might make sense to go out and buy a home. But, warns Pimco's Mr. Simon, "buy in areas you really know."
Plan to Stay Put
Buy and hold. While the good news is that the worst of the housing crash might be over, the bad news is that the fast gains of the glory days of 2005 and 2006 won't be back any time soon. So to cover the costs of buying and selling, and what could be a prolonged recovery, plan to own for more than 10 years, explains Jack Ablin, chief investment officer at Chicago-based Harris Bank.
Also remember that borrowing money to buy a house can still be risky. If you pay for a $100,000 property with $20,000 cash and borrow the rest, a dip in the value of $20,000 would leave you with zero equity. On top of that, you'd have to pay to maintain and repair the property, something not necessary when renting.
Why 2011 May Be the End of the Housing Crash
by Simon Constable
Monday, February 28, 2011
The Wall Street Journal
There might finally be some good news this year about the nation's dismal housing market. Or, at least, the bad news could stop.
Either way, it will be welcome relief for current homeowners as well as for potential real-estate investors. Reasons to be optimistic have been sadly lacking since the housing bubble burst in 2006.
For sure, last week we learned the widely watched S&P/Case-Shiller home-price index fell 1% in December, its fifth straight decline. The index tracks 20 major markets.
But that figure belies real reasons to be optimistic, according to some experts. If they are right, it might make sense to jump into real estate. The trick is avoiding getting burned again, and it doesn't necessarily mean owning a home.
First, let's recap the economic signs a bottom is close.
Houses Are a Good Deal
Housing is the most affordable it has been in decades, according to analysts at Moody's Analytics. They don't just look at house prices. They also look at incomes.
Nationally, the cost of a house is the equivalent of about 19 months of total pay for an average family, the lowest level in 35 years. Prices usually average close to two years' pay, although that varies nationally.
At the peak, midway through the last decade, a home in Los Angeles cost the equivalent of 4.5 years' pay. The average price has since fallen to just over two years' income now. That's well below its pre-bubble average of 2.6 years. This means average Los Angeles homes are cheaper in "real terms" than they were typically during the period 1989 through 2003.
The opposite is true around the Washington beltway, where it will take 26 months of pay to buy a home, versus the historical norm of 22 months.
In the end, it will be affordability that will drive people to buy homes.
"Pricing is down so much in some markets that when you analyze renting versus owning it makes much more sense to own," says Michael Larson, a real-estate analyst at Weiss Research in Jupiter, Fla.
It is definitely bullish. But what about timing?
"Housing prices will probably bottom in 2011," says Scott Simon, a managing director at money-management firm Pimco in Newport Beach, Calif. He foresaw the housing crash, helping his firm dodge losses that plagued Wall Street.
Mr. Simon says prices might dip another 5%. Still, in the scheme of things, that's small. Consider this: In some markets, home prices have fallen by half or more since 2006.
For instance, in once-hot Miami you can snap up an average house for under $166,000, according to recent data from the National Association of Realtors. That's down from $371,000 in 2006. Another 5% drop would take it to $158,000.
Investors Stepping Up
Here's another sign the market is nearing a bottom: Investors have started to buy up houses and condos, in some instances paying entirely in cash. That's a far cry from the heady bubble days when borrowed money seemed the key to riches. The bubble-era speculators who got burned tended to buy at the peak and borrowed heavily to do so. When the crash came, they quickly saw their wealth erased.
Take Miami again. Last year, more than half of all transactions were made entirely in cash, according to a recent report in The Wall Street Journal. That compares with 13% of deals in the last quarter of 2006, the height of the bubble. Similarly, in Phoenix 42% of sales in 2010 went to all-cash buyers, up threefold since 2008.
It's a sign that these investors are betting on a rebound. Investors buying at current prices are looking for deals, or so-called bottom fishing. They typically like to pay entirely in cash (or with a relatively small loan) to speed up transactions. That can be vital for an investor wishing to lock in a deal fast.
If this is a turn in the market, then it might make sense to go out and buy a home. But, warns Pimco's Mr. Simon, "buy in areas you really know."
Plan to Stay Put
Buy and hold. While the good news is that the worst of the housing crash might be over, the bad news is that the fast gains of the glory days of 2005 and 2006 won't be back any time soon. So to cover the costs of buying and selling, and what could be a prolonged recovery, plan to own for more than 10 years, explains Jack Ablin, chief investment officer at Chicago-based Harris Bank.
Also remember that borrowing money to buy a house can still be risky. If you pay for a $100,000 property with $20,000 cash and borrow the rest, a dip in the value of $20,000 would leave you with zero equity. On top of that, you'd have to pay to maintain and repair the property, something not necessary when renting.
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Should You Rent Out Your House or Sell It?
Contact Payam Raouf, Owner and Associate Broker of Arizona Property Management and Investments for a free consultation at 623-776-5774. Thank you.
Real Estate by Aleksandra Todorova (Author Archive)
Should You Rent Out Your House or Sell It?
In most cases, moving means selling one's home. After all, it's usually a necessary step in affording a new home.
But for various reasons some people choose to rent out their homes instead. In some instances, people know that they'll be leaving only for a year or two — perhaps while they pursue a graduate degree or take on a specific project at work. Sometimes the would-be seller simply can't sell at a price deemed acceptable, so he or she chooses to hang on until the market picks up. Or, if property values are rising, an owner may want to wait to be able to ask for a higher price later.
Whatever the reason, it's important to have a healthy grasp of the financial issues at play when weighing this decision. Here's what you need to consider.
The Tax Issues When You Sell
As you probably know, Uncle Sam provides a generous tax break for those who've lived in their home for at least two of the past five years. Married couples who file jointly can earn up to $500,000 in capital gains tax-free, while singles can enjoy $250,000 in tax-free gains. (For more on this, including exceptions to this rule, click here.)
Good news: Those who are planning on renting out their home for just a year or two will still be eligible for these breaks (provided they've lived in their home for at least two of the past five years). Should they sell more than three years later, however, they forgo the tax exemption, meaning their gain would be taxed as a capital gain.
Consequently, for those whose renting plans would turn a tax-free gain into a taxable one, it is probably wise to sell. The rule of thumb is if you have a large gain on your personal residence, you don't want to rent it out. There is an exception, however: If you're willing to move back into the house and live there for two years before you sell, you'll requalify for the exemption.
The Tax Issues When You Rent Out
Becoming a landlord also offers some handsome tax perks. While rental income is taxed as ordinary income, your tax bill could easily be eliminated thanks to the numerous deductions on expenses and depreciation. There is, however, one major exception: If you eventually sell the house and qualify for the capital-gains tax exemption discussed earlier, you'll be taxed on the amount you depreciate, which could make renting out your home considerably less attractive.
Let's talk expenses first. You can deduct pretty much any out-of-pocket expenses related to owning and managing the property. This includes your mortgage interest payments and property taxes (same as if this were your primary residence). It also includes other expenses, like advertising or broker fees, the costs of repairs to the property, maintenance expenses such as cleaning services, utilities and management company fees, the cost of fire and liability insurance, and even travel and local transportation expenses incurred for the maintenance of the property and collection of rent.
Then there's the "phantom deduction" called depreciation. Just divide the fair market value of the property at the time you start renting it out (excluding the cost of land) by its recovery period — which is 27.5 years for residential rental property. Bingo! There's your annual depreciation. For example, if the home is worth $550,000, you divide that by 27.5 and get a $20,000 annual deduction. If you have another $10,000 in out-of-pocket expenses, which are also deductible, you can get $30,000 in rent tax-free.
Improvements can't be deducted, but you recover their cost by depreciation. The good news is, you typically depreciate the cost of any appliances, carpeting, furniture or plumbing over only five years. So if you buy a new $1,000 dishwasher for your rental, you can deduct $200 a year from your rental income for five years. (This is pretty complicated stuff, so be sure to talk with a CPA before you file your returns.)
Renting Out
Pros
• Keep property as it appreciates
• Tax-breaks could offset income tax on rent
• Rent income covers mortgage, taxes and insurance payments
Cons
• Possible damages to property
• Could be taxed on the whole profit if you sell
• Potential legal or financial problems with tenants
Selling
Pros
· Likely tax-free capital gain
· Frees up equity that could be invested or rolled into new home
· Simplicity: Only one house to maintain
Cons
· Could be priced out of market if you want to return
· Lose potential property appreciation
· Could have to sell at a bad time for real-estate market in your area
Can You Afford to Rent?
For many homeowners, renting out a home is simply not a viable option; they need to sell in order to raise the capital necessary to buy their next home. And owning two homes requires deep cash reserves. Consider, for example, that there may be periods in which you have no renter or when a tenant may skip one or two months of rent. You have to figure out whether you will be able to make mortgage payments anyway.
There's also the risk that a tenant could damage your property or cause problems that lead to an expensive eviction process. Frighteningly, an eviction could cost you several thousands of dollars, or more, and could last as long as 18 months, during which time the tenant is likely to refuse to pay rent. So you need to be financially prepared for the worst.Is the House Likely to Appreciate?
If you expect prices in your area to soar markedly over a three-year time span, you may want to rent it out. But keep in mind that, historically speaking, real estate tends to appreciate at the rate of inflation (roughly 3% annually), so even when property values are in an upswing, that doesn't mean they'll continue to be.Look at the house as an investment, and think of it as part of your overall portfolio. Ask yourself: Am I diversified enough? If the majority of your net worth would be tied up in your two houses, you need more diversification, and you could be better off selling the house and investing the profit.Is It a Hot Rental Market or a Hot Sales Market?
Sometimes the market is better for sellers than for landlords. Call your local board of Realtors or a real estate agent and have them appraise the house; get the numbers for the rental and the numbers for the sale. Generally speaking, it will make sense to rent the house out only if it's in a relatively stable market and the income from rent will cover your mortgage and other related expenses.Do You Ever Plan to Come Back to the Same Area?
If you want to return to the same area years from now, you could be priced out of the market if you sell your house. It would therefore make sense to rent it out.Strangers in Your Home
Consider how comfortable you are with tenants living in your home. If you have a deep personal connection with the property, you may see it as an invasion of your space. If you set out to rent it, you must be prepared to handle the process in a businesslike manner.
Are You Cut Out to Be a Landlord?
Becoming a landlord isn't for the faint of heart. What happens if a pipe breaks and you're out of state on vacation? Being an absentee landlord is impossibly difficult unless you have someone to oversee the property. If you're willing to part with 10% of the monthly rent, you could hire a property-management company to do it. Depending on your agreement, it could take care of everything related to the property — from putting it on the market and screening your tenants to collecting rent, maintaining the property and even taking care of your mortgage.
Should you decide to seek the services of a management company, go through your local chapter of the National Association for Residential Property Managers, which represents managers of single-family homes, or through your state's or city's apartment owners association if you own an apartment.
Contact Payam Raouf, Owner and Associate Broker of Arizona Property Management and Investments for a free consultation at 623-776-5774. Thank you.
Real Estate by Aleksandra Todorova (Author Archive)
Should You Rent Out Your House or Sell It?
In most cases, moving means selling one's home. After all, it's usually a necessary step in affording a new home.
But for various reasons some people choose to rent out their homes instead. In some instances, people know that they'll be leaving only for a year or two — perhaps while they pursue a graduate degree or take on a specific project at work. Sometimes the would-be seller simply can't sell at a price deemed acceptable, so he or she chooses to hang on until the market picks up. Or, if property values are rising, an owner may want to wait to be able to ask for a higher price later.
Whatever the reason, it's important to have a healthy grasp of the financial issues at play when weighing this decision. Here's what you need to consider.
The Tax Issues When You Sell
As you probably know, Uncle Sam provides a generous tax break for those who've lived in their home for at least two of the past five years. Married couples who file jointly can earn up to $500,000 in capital gains tax-free, while singles can enjoy $250,000 in tax-free gains. (For more on this, including exceptions to this rule, click here.)
Good news: Those who are planning on renting out their home for just a year or two will still be eligible for these breaks (provided they've lived in their home for at least two of the past five years). Should they sell more than three years later, however, they forgo the tax exemption, meaning their gain would be taxed as a capital gain.
Consequently, for those whose renting plans would turn a tax-free gain into a taxable one, it is probably wise to sell. The rule of thumb is if you have a large gain on your personal residence, you don't want to rent it out. There is an exception, however: If you're willing to move back into the house and live there for two years before you sell, you'll requalify for the exemption.
The Tax Issues When You Rent Out
Becoming a landlord also offers some handsome tax perks. While rental income is taxed as ordinary income, your tax bill could easily be eliminated thanks to the numerous deductions on expenses and depreciation. There is, however, one major exception: If you eventually sell the house and qualify for the capital-gains tax exemption discussed earlier, you'll be taxed on the amount you depreciate, which could make renting out your home considerably less attractive.
Let's talk expenses first. You can deduct pretty much any out-of-pocket expenses related to owning and managing the property. This includes your mortgage interest payments and property taxes (same as if this were your primary residence). It also includes other expenses, like advertising or broker fees, the costs of repairs to the property, maintenance expenses such as cleaning services, utilities and management company fees, the cost of fire and liability insurance, and even travel and local transportation expenses incurred for the maintenance of the property and collection of rent.
Then there's the "phantom deduction" called depreciation. Just divide the fair market value of the property at the time you start renting it out (excluding the cost of land) by its recovery period — which is 27.5 years for residential rental property. Bingo! There's your annual depreciation. For example, if the home is worth $550,000, you divide that by 27.5 and get a $20,000 annual deduction. If you have another $10,000 in out-of-pocket expenses, which are also deductible, you can get $30,000 in rent tax-free.
Improvements can't be deducted, but you recover their cost by depreciation. The good news is, you typically depreciate the cost of any appliances, carpeting, furniture or plumbing over only five years. So if you buy a new $1,000 dishwasher for your rental, you can deduct $200 a year from your rental income for five years. (This is pretty complicated stuff, so be sure to talk with a CPA before you file your returns.)
Renting Out
Pros
• Keep property as it appreciates
• Tax-breaks could offset income tax on rent
• Rent income covers mortgage, taxes and insurance payments
Cons
• Possible damages to property
• Could be taxed on the whole profit if you sell
• Potential legal or financial problems with tenants
Selling
Pros
· Likely tax-free capital gain
· Frees up equity that could be invested or rolled into new home
· Simplicity: Only one house to maintain
Cons
· Could be priced out of market if you want to return
· Lose potential property appreciation
· Could have to sell at a bad time for real-estate market in your area
Can You Afford to Rent?
For many homeowners, renting out a home is simply not a viable option; they need to sell in order to raise the capital necessary to buy their next home. And owning two homes requires deep cash reserves. Consider, for example, that there may be periods in which you have no renter or when a tenant may skip one or two months of rent. You have to figure out whether you will be able to make mortgage payments anyway.
There's also the risk that a tenant could damage your property or cause problems that lead to an expensive eviction process. Frighteningly, an eviction could cost you several thousands of dollars, or more, and could last as long as 18 months, during which time the tenant is likely to refuse to pay rent. So you need to be financially prepared for the worst.Is the House Likely to Appreciate?
If you expect prices in your area to soar markedly over a three-year time span, you may want to rent it out. But keep in mind that, historically speaking, real estate tends to appreciate at the rate of inflation (roughly 3% annually), so even when property values are in an upswing, that doesn't mean they'll continue to be.Look at the house as an investment, and think of it as part of your overall portfolio. Ask yourself: Am I diversified enough? If the majority of your net worth would be tied up in your two houses, you need more diversification, and you could be better off selling the house and investing the profit.Is It a Hot Rental Market or a Hot Sales Market?
Sometimes the market is better for sellers than for landlords. Call your local board of Realtors or a real estate agent and have them appraise the house; get the numbers for the rental and the numbers for the sale. Generally speaking, it will make sense to rent the house out only if it's in a relatively stable market and the income from rent will cover your mortgage and other related expenses.Do You Ever Plan to Come Back to the Same Area?
If you want to return to the same area years from now, you could be priced out of the market if you sell your house. It would therefore make sense to rent it out.Strangers in Your Home
Consider how comfortable you are with tenants living in your home. If you have a deep personal connection with the property, you may see it as an invasion of your space. If you set out to rent it, you must be prepared to handle the process in a businesslike manner.
Are You Cut Out to Be a Landlord?
Becoming a landlord isn't for the faint of heart. What happens if a pipe breaks and you're out of state on vacation? Being an absentee landlord is impossibly difficult unless you have someone to oversee the property. If you're willing to part with 10% of the monthly rent, you could hire a property-management company to do it. Depending on your agreement, it could take care of everything related to the property — from putting it on the market and screening your tenants to collecting rent, maintaining the property and even taking care of your mortgage.
Should you decide to seek the services of a management company, go through your local chapter of the National Association for Residential Property Managers, which represents managers of single-family homes, or through your state's or city's apartment owners association if you own an apartment.
Contact Payam Raouf, Owner and Associate Broker of Arizona Property Management and Investments for a free consultation at 623-776-5774. Thank you.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Former homeowners flooding rental market.
Cheaper to buy than to rent in 72% of largest U.S. cities
Trulia: Former homeowners flooding rental market
BY INMAN NEWS, MONDAY, JANUARY 24, 2011.
Inman News™
Despite the rising number of renters across the country, it is cheaper to buy a home rather than rent one in 72 percent of the 50 largest cities in the U.S., according to an index released by real estate search and marketing site Trulia.
"Since the start of the 'Great Recession,' many former homeowners have flooded the rental market. Following the principles of supply and demand, renting has become relatively more expensive than buying in most markets," said Pete Flint, CEO and co-founder of Trulia, in a statement.
"Though necessary for achieving true economic recovery, stricter bank lending practices have also further aggravated the struggling housing market in the short term. Even highly qualified homebuyers face intense scrutiny on their income, savings, existing debt and credit history before they can get a mortgage loan."
Trulia's rent vs. buy index compares the median list price with the median rent on two-bedroom apartments, condominiums and townhomes listed on Trulia.com as of Jan. 10, 2011.
A price-to-rent ratio of 1 to 15 means that it's much cheaper to buy than to rent in a particular city. A ratio between 16 and 20 means that it's more expensive to rent than to buy, but, depending on the family's situation, buying could "make financial sense," the site said. Any ratio above 20 indicates that owning is much more costly than renting in a city.
In 36 out of 50 of the country's most populous cities, buying a two-bedroom home is less expensive than renting one. These cities include many areas that have been hit hard by foreclosures, such as Las Vegas, Phoenix and Fresno, Calif.
Top 10 cities to buy vs. rent:
Rank City State Price to Rent Ratio
1. Miami Fla. 6
2. Las Vegas Nev. 6
3. Arlington Texas 7
4. Mesa Ariz. 8
5. Phoenix Ariz. 8
6. Jacksonville Fla. 8
7. Sacramento Calif. 10
8. San Antonio Texas 11
9. Fresno Calif. 11
10. El Paso Texas 11
Source: Trulia
In 10 cities, renting is cheaper, but buying might make more financial sense, according to Trulia. These cities include Los Angeles, Boston, and Fort Worth, Texas.
The index considers the total cost of homeownership compared to the total cost of renting. Calculations for the total cost of homeownership include mortgage principal and interest, property taxes, hazard insurance, closing costs at time of purchase, homeowner’s association dues, and private mortgage insurance. The homeownership cost calculation also includes tax advantages from mortgage interest, property tax and closing-cost deductions.
Calculations for total rental cost include rent and renters insurance.
The total cost of homeownership was highest, compared to the cost to rent, in New York; Seattle; Kansas City, Mo.; and San Francisco.
Top 10 cities to rent vs. buy:
Rank City State Price:Rent Ratio
1. New York N.Y. 31
2. Seattle Wash. 24
3. Kansas City Mo. 21
4. San Francisco Calif. 21
5. Memphis Tenn. 20
6. Los Angeles Calif. 20
7. Fort Worth Texas 19
8. Oakland Calif. 18
9. Portland Ore. 18
10. Albuquerque N.M. 18
Source: Trulia
"Although owning a home is relatively more affordable in most cities, market conditions have caused an interesting demographic swap between traditional renters and buyers," said Tara-Nicholle Nelson, consumer educator for Trulia, in a statement. Nelson is also an Inman news columnist.
"For example, lifelong renters are seizing the opportunity to become homeowners while affordability is high. At the same time, a growing number of longtime homeowners are finding themselves tenants -- some by choice and others by necessity."
Through newly acquired startup Movity, Trulia created interactive maps comparing each city's population, projected job growth, and unemployment and foreclosure rates.
Trulia: Former homeowners flooding rental market
BY INMAN NEWS, MONDAY, JANUARY 24, 2011.
Inman News™
Despite the rising number of renters across the country, it is cheaper to buy a home rather than rent one in 72 percent of the 50 largest cities in the U.S., according to an index released by real estate search and marketing site Trulia.
"Since the start of the 'Great Recession,' many former homeowners have flooded the rental market. Following the principles of supply and demand, renting has become relatively more expensive than buying in most markets," said Pete Flint, CEO and co-founder of Trulia, in a statement.
"Though necessary for achieving true economic recovery, stricter bank lending practices have also further aggravated the struggling housing market in the short term. Even highly qualified homebuyers face intense scrutiny on their income, savings, existing debt and credit history before they can get a mortgage loan."
Trulia's rent vs. buy index compares the median list price with the median rent on two-bedroom apartments, condominiums and townhomes listed on Trulia.com as of Jan. 10, 2011.
A price-to-rent ratio of 1 to 15 means that it's much cheaper to buy than to rent in a particular city. A ratio between 16 and 20 means that it's more expensive to rent than to buy, but, depending on the family's situation, buying could "make financial sense," the site said. Any ratio above 20 indicates that owning is much more costly than renting in a city.
In 36 out of 50 of the country's most populous cities, buying a two-bedroom home is less expensive than renting one. These cities include many areas that have been hit hard by foreclosures, such as Las Vegas, Phoenix and Fresno, Calif.
Top 10 cities to buy vs. rent:
Rank City State Price to Rent Ratio
1. Miami Fla. 6
2. Las Vegas Nev. 6
3. Arlington Texas 7
4. Mesa Ariz. 8
5. Phoenix Ariz. 8
6. Jacksonville Fla. 8
7. Sacramento Calif. 10
8. San Antonio Texas 11
9. Fresno Calif. 11
10. El Paso Texas 11
Source: Trulia
In 10 cities, renting is cheaper, but buying might make more financial sense, according to Trulia. These cities include Los Angeles, Boston, and Fort Worth, Texas.
The index considers the total cost of homeownership compared to the total cost of renting. Calculations for the total cost of homeownership include mortgage principal and interest, property taxes, hazard insurance, closing costs at time of purchase, homeowner’s association dues, and private mortgage insurance. The homeownership cost calculation also includes tax advantages from mortgage interest, property tax and closing-cost deductions.
Calculations for total rental cost include rent and renters insurance.
The total cost of homeownership was highest, compared to the cost to rent, in New York; Seattle; Kansas City, Mo.; and San Francisco.
Top 10 cities to rent vs. buy:
Rank City State Price:Rent Ratio
1. New York N.Y. 31
2. Seattle Wash. 24
3. Kansas City Mo. 21
4. San Francisco Calif. 21
5. Memphis Tenn. 20
6. Los Angeles Calif. 20
7. Fort Worth Texas 19
8. Oakland Calif. 18
9. Portland Ore. 18
10. Albuquerque N.M. 18
Source: Trulia
"Although owning a home is relatively more affordable in most cities, market conditions have caused an interesting demographic swap between traditional renters and buyers," said Tara-Nicholle Nelson, consumer educator for Trulia, in a statement. Nelson is also an Inman news columnist.
"For example, lifelong renters are seizing the opportunity to become homeowners while affordability is high. At the same time, a growing number of longtime homeowners are finding themselves tenants -- some by choice and others by necessity."
Through newly acquired startup Movity, Trulia created interactive maps comparing each city's population, projected job growth, and unemployment and foreclosure rates.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)