26% of Fort Worth’s single family homes are owned by companies

[Bevo 13465]

I've been thinking about renting my home to my grown son and his GF instead of selling it. Now, after reading Surly, I am conflicted. Am I baaad?

[Dahobbs 17314]

12 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

Well why don’t you start by telling me exactly how this multi-decade trend is changing.

Further, I already explained it to you. At first you didn’t like the explanation and argued with me. Then you didn’t respond and bat signaled your CR buds to call me illiterate because I’ve the audacity to call a spade a spade: the reason is rates. The wealth gap shoehorn doesn’t fit here. 

What on earth are you talking about? You've been speaking gibberish most of this thread. I cant help that others called you out on it. I certainly didn't ask for any help in dealing with the mighty Rex Kramer. 

At any rate, lower, but non-zero, interest rates is a decent enough match for the data. I'm not sure it explains why lowered interest rates would lead to outsized investment by others and not homeowners, but at least the data generally correlates. 

Edited June 6 by Dahobbs

[Rex Kramer 1260]

3 minutes ago, Bevo said:

I've been thinking about renting my home to my grown son and his GF instead of selling it. Now, after reading Surly, I am conflicted. Am I baaad?

It’s not that Surly shouldn’t be your barometer. Whatever is deemed bad by Surly is generally a sensible practice. I know many people that have done the same with their kids. 

[Rex Kramer 1260]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

What on earth are you talking about? You've been speaking gibberish most of this thread. I cant help that others called you out on it. I certainly didn't ask for any help in dealing with the mighty Rex Kramer. 

At any rate, lower, but non-zero, interest rates is a decent enough match for the data. I'm not sure it explains why lowered interest rates would lead to outsized investment by others and not homeowners, but at least the data generally correlates. 

I’ve not been speaking gibberish. I’ve been very clear. 

Sounds like you’ve totally changed your mind on rates. If you don’t know why a 2.75% mortgage rate might lead to outsized investment in that space by those that can afford multiple homes, relative to individuals, I’m not sure you’re capable of having this conversation. 

[Zepol87 9133]

Companies owning entire communities for rental purposes is bad, my company included. Renting is also the only way I grew up in a house. My parents didn’t own a home until I was 25 so yes there is a need for it that gets you out of the shit and apts

[Dahobbs 17314]

1 minute ago, Rex Kramer said:

I’ve not been speaking gibberish. I’ve been very clear. 

Sounds like you’ve totally changed your mind on rates. If you don’t know why a 2.75% mortgage rate might lead to outsized investment in that space by those that can afford multiple homes, relative to individuals, I’m not sure you’re capable of having this conversation. 

You'd have to explain why investors are pouring more money into the housing sector rather than other sectors over that period and why the bulk of the population is less willing or able to invest in homeownership over the same period. If homeownership is a good investment, but not necessarily the best investment for those that can save, you'd think it would be prioritized more by those who need a home anyway and less by those who have other options on where to invest. I just don't think low interest rates, acting alone, is a good explanation for the trend we have seen. However, I could see that contributing to the trend in concert with other factors. 

[Rex Kramer 1260]

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

You'd have to explain why investors are pouring more money into the housing sector rather than other sectors over that period and why the bulk of the population is less willing or able to invest in homeownership over the same period. If homeownership is a good investment, but not necessarily the best investment for those that can save, you'd think it would be prioritized more by those who need a home anyway and less by those who have other options on where to invest. I just don't think low interest rates, acting alone, is a good explanation for the trend we have seen. However, I could see that contributing to the trend in concert with other factors. 

No, I don't need to explain that at all. Investors pour money into a vast array of shit. You know that. 

How do you know the “bulk” of the population  is less willing or able to buy a good home?  Last I checked, one home is sufficient for a family. If you’re building a portfolio, you’ll buy more than one home. 

Im not going to rehash arguments made about a big segment getting priced out by lower rates. This is 95%+ attributable to interest rates. 

[Brian Fantana 6650]

36 minutes ago, Bevo said:

I've been thinking about renting my home to my grown son and his GF instead of selling it. Now, after reading Surly, I am conflicted. Am I baaad?

Presumably you are a person that pays taxes and is generally a productive member of society as opposed to some large conglomerate that only exists to suck value out of society.

[Dahobbs 17314]

8 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

How do you know the “bulk” of the population  is less willing or able to buy a good home?  Last I checked, one home is sufficient for a family. If you’re building a portfolio, you’ll buy more than one home. 

I'm assuming the primary market for single family residences are as primary homes, whether as rentals or owner-occupied. If that is the case, an increase in invested owned homes necessarily means more families being either unwilling or unable to purchase their homes. If the market has shifted such that a greater percentage of homes are vacation homes, then that might explain the trend as well. 

Anyway, last post in response to you.

[hayden_horn 11348]

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I'm assuming the primary market for single family residences are as primary homes, whether as rentals or owner-occupied. If that is the case, an increase in invested owned homes necessarily means more families being either unwilling or unable to purchase their homes. If the market has shifted such that a greater percentage of homes are vacation homes, then that might explain the trend as well. 

Anyway, last post in response to you.

this is how bubbles happen

[Rex Kramer 1260]

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

If that is the case, an increase in invested owned homes necessarily means more families being either unwilling or unable to purchase their homes. If the market has shifted such that a greater percentage of homes are vacation homes, then that might explain the trend as well.

It doesn’t necessarily mean that at all. There are many factors. First, supply of homes. Second, the quantity of homes a company buys versus the one-home family will skew the percentages. Third, if a prospective working class homeowner is priced out of central Fort Worth but buys in Mansfield. 

Your last sentence doesn’t explain anything pertinent to the article. Fort Worth has no vacation home market. 

[Rex Kramer 1260]

5 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

this is how bubbles happen

It’s not. 

[Brew 2954]

2 hours ago, Rex Kramer said:

I’ve not been speaking gibberish. I’ve been very clear. 

Sounds like you’ve totally changed your mind on rates. If you don’t know why a 2.75% mortgage rate might lead to outsized investment in that space by those that can afford multiple homes, relative to individuals, I’m not sure you’re capable of having this conversation. 

You do realize that people who own multiple homes and those owned within corporate environments aren’t getting 2.75% mortgages, right? You could technically have 10 mortgages, but I can’t say I have ever seen anyone qualify. Usually, once they are past a few then they are dealing with bank side financing, not traditional backed mortgages.

[Brew 2954]

3 hours ago, LCHorn said:

Taxation is one remedy, but I would offer that the real cause is a failure of the modern economy to produce firms worth investing in (I.e., capital is looking for non-traditional investments).  Lots of guilty parties contributing to that, but lots of solutions as well.  

I don’t follow your logic here. It sounds like you are saying that institutional investors are having to go outside of typical investments because of lack of opportunity within the traditional space therefore they are chasing non-traditional investments. I don’t see that at all. The numbers on investments being made are up significantly. I would say it is more related to how much money is tied up in institutional investments whether PE, family office, retirement plans, etc that the massive wealth accumulation at that level along with a lot of other circumstances is driving the alternative investments.

[Rex Kramer 1260]

41 minutes ago, Brew said:

You do realize that people who own multiple homes and those owned within corporate environments aren’t getting 2.75% mortgages, right? You could technically have 10 mortgages, but I can’t say I have ever seen anyone qualify. Usually, once they are past a few then they are dealing with bank side financing, not traditional backed mortgages.

I understand that. I did use 2.75%, as it was pretty much a low, but have been careful to say “rates” and not “mortgage rates”. Up until about 18 months ago, entities had been able to probably accumulate massive portfolios at about a 5-6% cost of capital, and that was probably significantly lower if they were borrowing off of margin or some capital call facility. I do think there have been wealthy individuals / family offices that ultimately obtained first lien conforming or jumbo mortgages at lower rates. I know a guy in New York who owns about 75 homes I’d say specifically in Austin through a family LLC. I’ll ask him how he’s financed these purchases, but I do know they’re all lowly levered (relative to most other homeowners). Like probably not more than 50% LTV even at time of purchase. 

Edited June 6 by Rex Kramer

[safe sex 11623]

4 hours ago, Rex Kramer said:

Now. I get $10k back if I spend a little money to clean up after myself when I move out later this month. 

My dude, I don't even want to tell you how many months of wages that is for me. Kindly fuck off; we live in entirely different worlds 

4 hours ago, Rex Kramer said:

Now. I get $10k back if I spend a little money to clean up after myself when I move out later this month. 

Fucking double post 

Edited June 6 by safe sex

[LCHorn 2570]

2 hours ago, Brew said:

The numbers on investments being made are up significantly.

If true then I’m sure that’s a factor.  I’m saying that monopolies and cartels in many industries has had the result of limiting the choices managed funds have in equities, and they are looking elsewhere.  If what you’re saying is true then it might not just be a matter of total dollars, it might also be because funds (probably led by newer funds) need to justify themselves and that creates pressure to be creative or look in weird places for investments.  

I’m stealing this from the Hidden Forces podcast, but if we take one industry, let’s say automobile for familiarity, and posit that electric car demand is a huge disrupter that allows new entrants an easier path to market entry than 10 years ago (when they would be competing instead with firms that have up to 100 year head starts), then we should see more new firms than we are.  Instead it’s mostly just Tesla and a smattering of rival firms that are far smaller.  
 

if you’re managing a fund that doesn’t give you a lot of options for that industry, and telling your investors that you put their money in Tesla is something they are perfectly capable of doing on their own.   
 

I’m sure there’s all kinds of other reasons (potential for AI disruption in services, outsourcing, direct state subsidies in foreign markets) that also make equities seem riskier than in previous business cycles.  
 

 

[LCHorn 2570]

18 minutes ago, BeardIP said:

Did Twilight just come out? Because it feels like 2008. Loose restrictions on mortgage underwriting programs helped fuel that year’s market crash

That’s a clickbait article and something I’m seeing all too frequently from formerly reliable media sources like CNN and The NY Times.  I suppose even they need outrage to keep the money machine running and there’s only so much space they can devote to Trump.

What UWM is doing isn’t any different than what’s been offered by various down-payment assistance programs for the last 20 years, most of whom are using HUD money for the program funds (the Chenoa fund a notable exception, whose funds come from an Indian tribe).  Those didn’t seem to crash the economy and UWM has lots of federal and state data to show their approximate losses on those 2nd liens.

I don’t know how UWM’s program will work, but the traditional government programs are all very niche, anyway, and have some big downsides (increased cost of borrowing, 2nd lien can’t be resubordinated so borrower can’t refinance until they have enough equity to pay off 2nd lien).  
 

My impression is that UWM rolls these out because they know websites like CNN will talk about them and it gives their brokers something to sell, but they won’t write many mortgages that actually use them (by design).

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4962]

How much of this (if any) can be attributed to the tightening of lending standards post 2009? It's pretty generally accepted that renting costs more than owning, albeit with less risk if the market tanks. But to own, one generally needs capital and financial discipline to qualify for a mortgage. With tighter standards, fewer people can qualify. But that doesn't mean the demand for homes to live in has gone down. Which leaves renting. And to rent, somebody else has to own it. Looking at the graph posted on page one, it seems like the trend really started taking off post financial crisis. Which is exactly what one should expect following a tightening of lending standards. 

[Brew 2954]

7 hours ago, Rex Kramer said:

I understand that. I did use 2.75%, as it was pretty much a low, but have been careful to say “rates” and not “mortgage rates”. Up until about 18 months ago, entities had been able to probably accumulate massive portfolios at about a 5-6% cost of capital, and that was probably significantly lower if they were borrowing off of margin or some capital call facility. I do think there have been wealthy individuals / family offices that ultimately obtained first lien conforming or jumbo mortgages at lower rates. I know a guy in New York who owns about 75 homes I’d say specifically in Austin through a family LLC. I’ll ask him how he’s financed these purchases, but I do know they’re all lowly levered (relative to most other homeowners). Like probably not more than 50% LTV even at time of purchase. 

I deal with large investors often and have been in partnerships with 200+ single families at one point in time, but I don’t deal with institutional investors. Most of the time there is somewhere around a 2% minimum spread difference between owner financed using the mortgage market and investor financed using the bank side financing. There was definitely a run up in non institutional investors that we deal with purchasing when rates were lower because they could buy in the high 4’s / low 5’s on rates. That’s probably closer to an 8-9 today.

That 2.75% rate should have expanded ownership opportunities, but instead inflation and supply issues offset the benefit.

Edited June 6 by Brew

[Brew 2954]

5 hours ago, LCHorn said:

I’m stealing this from the Hidden Forces podcast, but if we take one industry, let’s say automobile for familiarity, and posit that electric car demand is a huge disrupter that allows new entrants an easier path to market entry than 10 years ago (when they would be competing instead with firms that have up to 100 year head starts), then we should see more new firms than we are.  Instead it’s mostly just Tesla and a smattering of rival firms that are far smaller.  
 

The auto industry is a terrible example of fund backed investment opportunities. The runway is too long for a typical PE type fund that is looking to return capital to investors in under 3 years. It might work for an institutional fund but the ability to make money operationally there is still a huge question mark. It comes down to whether you can get public interest behind you to cash out on a public offering which is a massive gamble.

There is significantly more money in that space than ever before. We get emails daily from funds looking to make investments that are startups, known funds, and everything in between. I think I’ve talked to 10+ family offices in the last few months that are all 9-10 figure family offices making investments. There is too much money concentrated at the top of the system, so when you are competing with them on single family housing it’s a losing proposition.

[Rex Kramer 1260]

15 minutes ago, Brew said:

There was definitely a run up in non institutional investors that we deal with purchasing when rates were lower because they could buy in the high 4’s / low 5’s on rates. That’s probably closer to an 8-9 today.

You’re talking about commercial bank debt, and not mortgages, correct?

[Brew 2954]

1 minute ago, Rex Kramer said:

You’re talking about commercial bank debt, and not mortgages, correct?

Yes, commercial bank debt. You can only hold a few mortgages. Technically, you can go to 10 I believe, but most people don’t qualify because the qualifications don’t change so every additional one makes the spread to qualify get more narrow. If everything is paid for, you can mortgage a few properties to provide buying opportunity, but you’re not getting to 75 (or even 25) without using bank side financing if you are financing.

[LCHorn 2570]

47 minutes ago, Brew said:

Yes, commercial bank debt. You can only hold a few mortgages. Technically, you can go to 10 I believe, but most people don’t qualify because the qualifications don’t change so every additional one makes the spread to qualify get more narrow. If everything is paid for, you can mortgage a few properties to provide buying opportunity, but you’re not getting to 75 (or even 25) without using bank side financing if you are financing.

The logistics of it also become insane.  We did a GSE loan for a guy in 2021 (several actually) that owned over 90 houses free and clear and the documentation burden was insane.  There’s no way we made money on them if we actually looked at the hours of labor involved.  

[The Royal We 3057]

11 hours ago, Rex Kramer said:

Your last sentence doesn’t explain anything pertinent to the article. Fort Worth has no vacation home market. 

There are 15 pages of results on Airbnb for homes with at least 2 bed rooms that are available to rent for a weekend in the month of August. It's like this everywhere. Even in tiny little towns out in the sticks, you can find a place on Airbnb.

https://www.airbnb.com/s/Fort-Worth--Texas--United-States/homes?tab_id=home_tab&refinement_paths[]=%2Fhomes&monthly_start_date=2024-07-01&monthly_length=3&monthly_end_date=2024-10-01&price_filter_input_type=0&channel=EXPLORE&query=Fort Worth%2C TX&place_id=ChIJrQfILRJuToYRvaxp3fiLr6Q&date_picker_type=flexible_dates&flexible_trip_lengths[]=weekend_trip&flexible_trip_dates[]=august&source=structured_search_input_header&search_type=filter_change&search_mode=regular_search&price_filter_num_nights=2&room_types[]=Entire home%2Fapt&min_bedrooms=2

The truth here, like most things, is somewhere in the middle of everyone arguing. Small investors buying run down homes and fixing them up to rent or sell does add value to the system. Not everyone is a blood-sucking vulture like Blackrock just looking to maximize shareholder value however possible. I do think that massive corporations buying up portfolios of SFHs is a big problem that is going to continue to cause all kinds of issues.

As long as they don't look to the US Govt to socialize their losses when the inevitable correction comes.... 

 

Edited June 6 by The Royal We

[safe sex 11623]

Just now, The Royal We said:

As long as they don't look to the US Govt to socialize their losses when the inevitable correction comes.... 

 

Don't worry; they will

[Rex Kramer 1260]

2 minutes ago, The Royal We said:

There are 15 pages of results on Airbnb for homes with at least 2 bed rooms that are available to rent for a weekend in the month of August. It's like this everywhere. Even in tiny little towns out in the sticks, you can find a place on Airbnb.

Yeah. But it’s not a vacation home market, and Airbnb isn’t going to drive skewing numbers to 26%.

1 minute ago, safe sex said:

Don't worry; they will

I have zero love for Blackrock, for many reasons. But I’m not sure how this is the case. They had nothing to do with ‘08 as far as I can remember. They’re a PE firm. 

Im also not sure people remember how much money taxpayers made (and not lost) through the TARP programs from ‘08-‘11. 

8 hours ago, safe sex said:

My dude, I don't even want to tell you how many months of wages that is for me. Kindly fuck off; we live in entirely different worlds 

Okay, well, I’m just telling you security deposits are actually very much a thing.  Also my situation is topical on the insane discrepancy between owning and leasing and how people set money on fire.

My home had a burst pipe. We are in a 6-month rental. Insurance pays $18.5k per month.  We have a $10k security deposit and it’s the only thing I’ve come out of pocket.

My mortgage is 1/3 of the monthly lease my insurance company is paying. My isolated case is unique in that I’m only leasing for 6 months and the homeowner was able to jack up the monthly lease from $12k to $18.5k because it’s not a 12-month lease. 

[safe sex 11623]

Were you under the impression I was saying that security deposits don't exist?

[Brian Fantana 6650]

52 minutes ago, safe sex said:

Were you under the impression I was saying that security deposits don't exist?

Let him cook he's dropping that deep insider knowledge. And totally not trying to do a weird flex.

[wildcat09 29107]

Rex is actually a million monkeys at typewriters and whenever they randomly generate a few actual sentences Surly's greatest asshole hits "submit reply." 

[Rex Kramer 1260]

2 hours ago, safe sex said:

Were you under the impression I was saying that security deposits don't exist?

Yes. Guess you had some other point. 

1 hour ago, Brian Fantana said:

Let him cook he's dropping that deep insider knowledge. And totally not trying to do a weird flex.

It’s odd that anything about what I posted would be considered a flex. Flexing on a message board where nobody except one guy knows me. 

[Samson's Wig 3167]

4 hours ago, The Royal We said:

As long as they don't look to the US Govt to socialize their losses when the inevitable correction comes.... 

 

lol

[Samson's Wig 3167]

Some of the comments in this thread help me understand how so many of the dvoryanstvo never saw it coming, despite all the obvious signs. 

[Rex Kramer 1260]

37 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

lol

Explain how this would work

[Samson's Wig 3167]

31 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

Explain how this would work

You need an explanation as to whether they might ask for a capital injection if their businesses are facing failure?   I mean, I guess you're right to be dubious as we've never seen any other industry do this before with success.

 

[Rex Kramer 1260]

26 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

You need an explanation as to whether they might ask for a capital injection if their businesses are facing failure?   I mean, I guess you're right to be dubious as we've never seen any other industry do this before with success.

 

For a private equity investment fund disconnected from systemic risk?  I’ve seen literally thousands fail in the last 10 years.  None requested any capital from the government, much less received any.  It’s just a lazy, generic critique that gets thrown around a lot, and 99% of the time, the critique is applied to situations that are apples to the Great Recession’s oranges.  

[Samson's Wig 3167]

I'm sorry, but I can't take a part-time airline mechanic and full-time daredevil seriously on this topic.

[wild_turkey 3127]

19 hours ago, Rex Kramer said:

Yeah. But it’s not a vacation home market, and Airbnb isn’t going to drive skewing numbers to 26%.

Maybe not 26% in a place like Fort Worth, but I think it’s pretty well established that Airbnb drives up housing prices and makes entry into home ownership more expensive.

I don’t have time to dig into it right now, but I seem to remember Hawaii having a major problem with this in the past few years to the point they were considering restricting Airbnb, VRBO, etc. Obviously the OP is about Fort Worth and not Hawaii, but I think there’s a reasonable discussion to be had about Airbnb and its contribution to the difficulty of home ownership in many areas.

[Neonmoon 38127]

We have a supply problem. 
 

Nothing more. 

[Brian Fantana 6650]

Yep that's it. There's no more nuance.

[Rex Kramer 1260]

16 hours ago, Samson's Wig said:

I'm sorry, but I can't take a part-time airline mechanic and full-time daredevil seriously on this topic.

My namesake is Robert Stack alone. And he was no mechanic. He was a former fighter pilot who will never forget Macho Grande. 

Your attempt at comedy to deflect from responding to my post is noted. 

[Brew 2954]

2 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

We have a supply problem. 
 

Nothing more. 

Clearly an issue, now go into the reasons we have a supply problem. You know things like corporate ownership on an expanding scale, rising interest rate environment driving people to stay in their houses, changing tax policy, hell even the current political environment resulting in a shift in where people are living, etc.

[We’reTexas 1467]

21 minutes ago, Brew said:

Clearly an issue, now go into the reasons we have a supply problem. You know things like corporate ownership on an expanding scale, rising interest rate environment driving people to stay in their houses, changing tax policy, hell even the current political environment resulting in a shift in where people are living, etc.

The main reasons are (1) local zoning regulations that have obstructed growth for decades followed by (2) periodic market downturns over that period that have adversely affected the economics of home building. Corporate investment is a symptom of supply shortage, not a cause. It is literally the investment thesis of these ventures. And on a national scale, corporate investment is irrelevant-something like 3% of homes. As I mentioned, it is certainly a major factor in some markets (metro Atlanta has been about 25% of purchases over the last few years IIRC), but in the Bay Area where I live - ground zero of the housing crisis - it is basically nonexistent. 

[Fico 1732]

We had a supply problem with lower rates... its is going to get worse now.

Although it is ultimately a local issue, nationally, we have a zoning issue. Zoning/entitlement needs to be changes/altered to allow for denser housing development nationwide.  Every developer in the world would rather put down three (3) cheaper units as opposed to one more expensive unit. It's simple a matter of buyer pool and mitigating risk.  Driving down the cost and the hurdles to build more units will ultimately lead to more units, which will drive down the cost (flatten the rate of increase).

More housing units need to be built, and allowing for more density ultimately drives down the costs for development, while supplying the units the system needs.

 

^^^ What that guy up there said.

Edited June 7 by Fico

[Hard Times 287]

3 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

We have a supply problem. 
 

Nothing more. 

It's not just supply, but quantity supplied. I'm sure most of the national builders have financial analysts employed who calculate where Marginal Cost=Marginal Revenue. But there's also the issue of not being able to get enough labor to build the number of houses they can sell.

[shakahorn 1619]

5 hours ago, wild_turkey said:

Maybe not 26% in a place like Fort Worth, but I think it’s pretty well established that Airbnb drives up housing prices and makes entry into home ownership more expensive.

I don’t have time to dig into it right now, but I seem to remember Hawaii having a major problem with this in the past few years to the point they were considering restricting Airbnb, VRBO, etc. Obviously the OP is about Fort Worth and not Hawaii, but I think there’s a reasonable discussion to be had about Airbnb and its contribution to the difficulty of home ownership in many areas.

There are many restrictions now in place especially Oahu and Maui.  Maui having had the restrictions a few years longer. There are still a few folks trying to get around the restrictions but for the most part the restrictions are working.  Now whether the desired effect of such restrictions are working is tbd.  But I don't think Hawaii has as much corp ownership as the rest of the country either.

[Samson's Wig 3167]

25 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

My namesake is Robert Stack alone. And he was no mechanic. He was a former fighter pilot who will never forget Macho Grande. 

Your attempt at comedy to deflect from responding to my post is noted. 

Then please also note your obtuse comment didn't merit a reply, hence the weak attempt at comedy, but okay here's a response:   Sure, small and middling PE firms fail without fanfare. No one said they didn't.   I never wrote that any PE firm, even a large one, would actually be bailed out, which seems to be your misguided point of contention.  I merely laughed at the notion that they wouldn't try, and your lack of reading comprehension and irrational level of defensiveness on this subject took care of the rest.  I wasn't even engaging with you, and have no real interest in doing so moving forward.  If you don't think a PE firm the size of Bain Capital, The Carlyle Group (both clients of mine), or BlackRock wouldn't seek assistance were they facing insolvency, you're merely highlighting that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. 

And while we're at it, I'll go ahead and point out that your earlier comment about TARP making money is complete bullshit, although commonly touted bullshit among investment bankers thanks to a false Treasury Dept. memo that still gets passed around, as TARP managed to net out about a $15B before you factor in inflation, but since, you know, inflation exists, the actual number is a loss of ~$24B.   But why get caught up on numbers, right?  Was TARP necessary?  I think so, but I'm also tired of listening to know-nothing mid-level investment bankers and low-level VPs at PE firms spewing similar rhetoric as you have in this thread.  You probably also think it was Andy who went to pieces when it was clearly Buddy.
 

[Samson's Wig 3167]

3 minutes ago, shakahorn said:

There are many restrictions now in place especially Oahu and Maui.  Maui having had the restrictions a few years longer. There are still a few folks trying to get around the restrictions but for the most part the restrictions are working.  Now whether the desired effect of such restrictions are working is tbd.  But I don't think Hawaii has as much corp ownership as the rest of the country either.

Every short-term rental that gets turned into a long-term rental space for actual residents to live in is a win.  If they're sold to a resident/owner, even better.

[Rex Kramer 1260]

3 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

Then please also note your obtuse comment didn't merit a reply, hence the weak attempt at comedy, but okay here's a response:   Sure, small and middling PE firms fail without fanfare. No one said they didn't.   I never wrote that any PE firm, even a large one, would actually be bailed out, which seems to be your misguided point of contention.  I merely laughed at the notion that they wouldn't try, and your lack of reading comprehension and irrational level of defensiveness on this subject took care of the rest.  I wasn't even engaging with you, and have no real interest in doing so moving forward.  If you don't think a PE firm the size of Bain Capital, The Carlyle Group (both clients of mine), or BlackRock wouldn't seek assistance were they facing insolvency, you're merely highlighting that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. 

And while we're at it, I'll go ahead and point out that your earlier comment about TARP making money is complete bullshit, although commonly touted bullshit among investment bankers thanks to a false Treasury Dept. memo that still gets passed around, as TARP managed to net out about a $15B before you factor in inflation, but since, you know, inflation exists, the actual number is a loss of ~$24B.   But why get caught up on numbers, right?  Was TARP necessary?  I think so, but I'm also tired of listening to know-nothing mid-level investment bankers and low-level VPs at PE firms spewing similar rhetoric as you have in this thread.  You probably also think it was Andy who went to pieces when it was clearly Buddy.
 

Blackrock wouldn’t face insolvency over this. They’d have a fund that’d lose billions, and it’d hurt their reputation. But that’s it. If their solvency were threatened as part of a wider systemic risk, I absolutely agree, but that is not the case and is my entire point.

TARP absolutely did make money on its financials investments. The program was expanded inexplicably under Obama to GM and beyond and I can’t comment on that.  

[Skipper 5998]

37 minutes ago, shakahorn said:

There are many restrictions now in place especially Oahu and Maui.  Maui having had the restrictions a few years longer. There are still a few folks trying to get around the restrictions but for the most part the restrictions are working.  Now whether the desired effect of such restrictions are working is tbd.  But I don't think Hawaii has as much corp ownership as the rest of the country either.

Agreed the Air BNB issue needs to be solved at a local level.  A ban was put in place in Dallas although believe it is still be litigated last I heard.  I don't know whether likely inevitable regulation did it or it was the fact that the olds in my neighborhood probably called in every violation and otherwise made it miserable, but the one STR in my general area lasted about 18 months before they sold a few months ago.  Which is a good thing.  Because I'm 100% on board that STR's have absolutely zero business operating in residential neighborhoods.  Vacation destinations or condos etc. in a city are one thing but it's bullshit in a neighborhood.  I could probably make a lot more $$ on my rental (that is less than a mile away from my house) if I turned it into a STR but would never do that to the neighbors.

Edited June 7 by Skipper