In the UK the market is referred to as HMO (House of Multiple Occupancy)
You can either target students or workers visiting the area, either way they do not usually stay beyond 1 year. The yields are higher on paper but it is usually not recommended for passive investors since as Patirou says you have more turnover and repairs. You need to be on standby to visit the property regularly and sort out issues with rent arrears, evictions, disputes between renters etc.
Because of the low available inventory, it is customary for the renters to pay for the whole year in order to keep their rooms for the following year/semester.
The main target will be uni students+young professionals who just need a place to sleep.
I have a management company which will manage all repairs, late night calls AND contract management for 8% fee of total rents (1 month rent per year).
If this works well, after 4-5 apartments itâs worth it to create my own management company and employ a full time employee to do this management.
It wonât be 100% passive but with the management company I am assuming 90% passive. I will keep you guys updated
Exactly, i managed to get the property for 187k instead of 217k. The purchase price is about 2/3 of your real estate investment, so for now iâm more than happy. Iâll let you know after 5 years if itâs still the case
Regarding vacancies, the building is well located, in the middle of the city and there is a waiting list for renters, every year the renter as to say if he wants to stay or not.
People are being priced out in some places, sometimes because of investment in short term rentals.
(esp. in more touristy places)
Though didnât most large European city now regulate things like AirBnB so that they now limit the amount of apartments dedicated to short term rentals?
Short term rental are transforming long term location flat for travelers. So you are removing potential flat for local tenants.
HĂŽtel are not. It is dedicated building for travelers.
Thereâs zoning regulation in most places. You normally canât just build a hotel or transform a building into a hotel. Those regulation usually have very specific goal to try to make cities livable long term (mixed usage, green space, public transportation, etc.). (but letâs not debate that, that will quickly degenerate )
If weâre truly going down that libertarian rabbit hole, Iâd demand that private ownership of land should be abolished.
Youâd rather rent or lease every piece of land you want to build upon from the government - at the governmentâs (fair and socially benevolent) terms and conditions.
Why should you or anybody own land rafter all? Land ownership is merely a title or right bestowed upon you by government. Thereâs no natural law or right to own land. Itâs not as if you invented, built, made or created it.
And any occupation of land deprives me of my freedom to walk on said land and enjoy its fruits.
Nah, letâs not go into that rabbit hole, sorry for bringing it up in the first place.
But Iâd like to point out the Swedish system where you do own land like most everywhere, but you canât deny others the right to enter, camp, pick berries/fruits in your land. I find that a good compromise, but maybe it works only because of the low density of the population in the north.
Durch das Lesen und die Teilnahme an diesem Forum bestÀtigst du, dass du den auf http://www.mustachianpost.com/de/ dargestellten Haftungsausschluss gelesen hast und damit einverstanden bist.