Understanding Real Differences — Real Estate Investors Sometimes Gloss Over ‘Difference Makers’

In a conversation the other day, I was talking with a local retired investor, about how folks will analyze properties into submission while missing the basic reason why one is easily the better choice. I used to believe it was merely an indicator of human nature — folks will use analysis sometimes to back up their bias for one property over others. But now? Not so much.

It’s not that investors don’t want the best possible results for their capital. It’s almost always the meshing of objective and subjective gears — easier said than done, right? In areas like San Diego, Palo Alto, San Mateo, San Francisco, and much of L.A. and Orange County, the bias for local property over clearly superior options is still present. I’ll use San Diego as an example.

Prices for income property here have been slaughtered the last almost four years. A stone’s throw from my own office is a case in point. At the top of the boom it would’ve sold in days for closer to $600,000 than $550,000. Today? It’s on the market for about $400,000 and breathlessly awaiting offers. Assuming the numbers compare favorably with other properties out of state (not a supportable assumption more times than not), what would make the decision simpler?

For 90% of San Diego real estate investors, one factor alone should make their decisions far easier. I’ve been selling and/or exchanging income property here since the end of 1976. Property built that year in San Diego is now considered young. It’s not uncommon to see listings in some well located parts of town with ‘built dates’ preceding the end of the Korean War. Only 35 years old? A puppy in San Diego. :)

Most reading this aren’t from around here so I’ll ask you — everything else being equal, do you want the new to 10 year old property, or the one that’s older than you are? This doesn’t take into account another huge factor. Most of the properties we see and like in other states have offered what we consider to be superior product in terms of attracting better quality tenants.

A 45 year old duplex with a couple 2 bedroom 1 bath units sporting ‘I Love Lucy’ kitchens simply don’t measure up to the duplex elsewhere, built this year, offering 3 bedroom 2 bath units with modern kitchens and attached garages — usually 2-car garages. San Diego? If a duplex here offers garages, they’re almost guaranteed to be 1-car affairs and many times not only detached, but located in an alley.

So I pose the question: Why would an objective investor, armed with cogent, well done analysis opt for ancient units when the alternative is so obviously superior? Think about selling/exchanging those antique units years down the road. By then the investing public will have adjusted to out of state options to a much larger degree than they currently do — and a huge minority of investors around the country have adjusted just fine, thank you. What will it be like trying to find a buyer for property ‘less than half a century old’? :)

It gets worse when you’re nearing the end game — retirement. Do you seriously wanna be the owner of a bunch of income property which at one time could’ve housed sailors returning home from WWII? Do ya think that’ll impact your net income? Do ya think it’ll have a dampening affect on the quality of tenant and the rents those tenants will pay?

Staying local in the face of overwhelming empirical evidence of predictably inferior results will ultimately come home to roost at the worst possible time. Don’t let your personal biases guide you when analyzing your next move. It can and will cost you huge amounts of future retirement income and capital gains — not to mention the time and money spent on management requirements and maintenance/repair on the way there.

This is a serious problem facing hundreds of investors all over the country, but especially in California. Overcoming your bias for local property in the face of the hugely modified field on which we all must now operate, is imperative to the success of your retirement.

I implore you — take a step back and see what’s right in front of you.

Call me to chat about what you should be doing about now. 619 889-7100 will get you to me. Besides, I need a fix. :) Have a good one.

Related posts:

  1. Understanding The Difference Between Flipping And Being A Real Estate Investor
  2. Real Estate Investors — The Difference Between Pessimism And Reality
  3. San Diego Real Estate Investors Try To Avoid Saying ‘What Was I Thinkin” 5 Years From Now
  4. The Folly Of Missin’ The Same Bus Twice — Pay Attention Real Estate Investors
  5. How Can San Diego Real Estate Investors Improve Their Current Strategy?
About BawldGuy

I'm second generation real estate, first licensed in fall of 1969. Having been mentored by several iconic brokers, I'm also CCIM trained, having completed all 200 hours back in 1980. Have successfully executed well over 200 tax deferred exchanges, many of which have been multi-state in nature. Strong points are analysis and the creation and real world application of Purposeful Plans employing several strategies synergistically. The idea is to arrive at retirement with the most after tax income possible, backed by the largest net worth.

Contact BawldGuy | BawldGuy's Google Profile

Comments

  1. Another Investor says:

    Can’t resist playing Devil’s advocate with this one…

    1. People WANT to live in San Diego, San Mateo County, and Palo Alto. The schools are the best and so are the other amenities. When they buy, people will pay any price to “get in.” Those that cannot afford to buy, rent. And most folks cannot afford to buy. In other areas, the barriers to buying are low. Good tenants usually turn into buyers fairly quickly.

    2. The best jobs that attract the most talented people are in places like San Diego, San Mateo County and Palo Alto. Demand almost always exceeds supply and you can have your pick of tenants. Haven’t seen 40 or 50 percent vacancy in any small income property around here in my lifetime. Ask anyone in Texas that’s been there for 25 years what occupancy was like in the last oil bust.

    3. Supply is constrained. The reason you have ancient buildings is there ain’t any more land to build on. You aren’t competing with new product. Places like Texas and Arizona? Go another quarter mile out and build more supply.

    4. Future value. If you hold that coastal California 4-plex until it crumbles, you will probably have a higher and better use (redevelopment opportunity) for the land. Anywhere else? It’s just another 4-plex lot.

    5. Marketability. Right now we have a rapidly growing Asian population. A lot of wealth generated overseas is parked in California real estate. Your likely future buyer is used to very low cap rates and thinks in terms of cash flow for the grandchildren.

    For these reasons, prices should increase faster here in the future as they have in the past. However, Bawld Guy is right on the most important issue. Your capital growth may not be best served by buying properties here. You gotta sit down and thoroughly review the numbers. Cash flow, equity build-up, and appreciation all have to be considered, and when they are, you may be surprised at what will grow your net worth the fastest.

  2. Robert Coté says:

    Umm, umm, umm. I’ll think a bit before replying. It’s only fair. For now let’s just say I’m not as excited about Coastal California as is “Another Investor.” At the risk of being insulting “AI” sounds a lot like Greg Swann circa 2006. Even Greg 2009 doesn’t like the Greg of that time.

    N.B. And no, Greg does not get a free pass for his recent British media comments.

Speak Your Mind

*