I see a lot of the opposite these days (Zurich city). It only gives bad publicity if it’s obvious that it’s a lie. When owners make their intention public a couple of years ahead, people start moving out on their own and owners can still rent out the flats with a terminable contract.
Are those old buildings (>50y) or recently renovated ones?
What I mean would be more common, bringing the kitchen / bathrooms / electricity up to par piece by piece will occur more regularly than emptying out an entire building.
I was wondering if you don’t prefer that model anymore?
yes, but a full renovation is much cheaper to manage if you’re owning the whole thing (volume discounts on material + only one big hoop of work instead of e.g 17 times the same work spread across 3-4 years with preparations, material storage, recycling, etc.
apparently I’m never satisfied 
but let’s say I want some further diversification.
Most of the time, renovation of old appartement buildings is staggered according to the natural tenent rotation. Emptying a full building will make a big hole in the returns. You also have the risk that a single opposition from a tenant delays the whole start of the works, with a building sitting mostly empty.
2 Likes
The nice thing about an apartment building vs spare apartments is that you’ll need to work with a building management company that will take care of most of the boring work. You only need to focus on higher level decisions instead of doing things like arranging a repair with a plumber or other stuff like that.
Got it. Would be curious to hear the conclusion