Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
gruffydd

Wall Street’S Rental Home Gamble: How Worried Should We Be?

Recommended Posts

http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/fault-lines/FaultLinesBlog/2014/11/7/wall-street-s-rentalhomegamblehowworriedshouldwebe0.html

nearly fell off my chair... basically the bankers are continuing to unleash hell... financialization continues apace (despite everything)... reducing growth and incomes for most of us while boosting the incomes of the super rich further still. Makes me sick!

Edited by gruffydd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As things are it's inevitable with them being allowed to more or less conjure credit/money out of thin air and then any risk is bailed out by the taxpayer.

They will own what they want.

All with the connivance of the politicians who get paid off by what used to be called the financiers - and the concerns of the electorate being ignored.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the famous saying goes, "Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws".

Edited by Errol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rents are rising in Spain where pirate equity and hedge funds piled into social housing.

I've no doubt it will happen here in the UK too (well it is happening) whoever I vote, or not vote for.

'In order to make money, first capture a State.' ~ SecureTenant 2014

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably once the financiers own all the housing you'll have to pay rent all your life so no retirement - unless you can put enough aside and look what they're doing to savings even now.

There'll not even be the possibility of "owning" your own little place outright with small outgoings.

Likely some will be more benign than others but who would want to risk being under the less benign.

In the long run it doesn't seem to be a good idea.

Under the current politicians the best that the electorate might be able to do is to churn the politicians if even only for a bit of fun and so that no politician gets an extended period. At least it's something. Churning the safer seats is even better. Voting UKIP might be able to do that for a period with the wicked LibLabCon.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its all over the place.

behind many deals which do not seem to make sense you can find some fund which is part funded/owned by a bank which is getting the money for free.

Add this to the holding of distressed assets rather than releasing to market it was a pretty bargain free recession for the average joe.

The tell for me is the number of new houses and people in the country in the last ten years....but the number of houses and businesses for sale is so low in comparison.

Edited by Fromage Frais

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/fault-lines/FaultLinesBlog/2014/11/7/wall-street-s-rentalhomegamblehowworriedshouldwebe0.html

nearly fell off my chair... basically the bankers are continuing to unleash hell... financialization continues apace (despite everything)... reducing growth and incomes for most of us while boosting the incomes of the super rich further still. Makes me sick!

I stated on this forum many times that private equity firms and hedge funds are buying up tens of thousands of vacant houses to sell as single-family rental homes.

There was also an anecdotal evidence (a few years back reported on this forum) that the same thing (City funds are buying 100's of homes in North England through proxies and that they do not ask the price,they just buy) is happening in the UK, and that is one of the reasons why UK house prices have been maintained high and went higher.

Despite all the above, the majority of HPCers seem to disbelieve the above.

I hope that the people will finally wake up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stated on this forum many times that private equity firms and hedge funds are buying up tens of thousands of vacant houses to sell as single-family rental homes.

There was also an anecdotal evidence (a few years back reported on this forum) that the same thing (City funds are buying 100's of homes in North England through proxies and that they do not ask the price,they just buy) is happening in the UK, and that is one of the reasons why UK house prices have been maintained high and went higher.

Despite all the above, the majority of HPCers seem to disbelieve the above.

I hope that the people will finally wake up.

Is there anywhere I can read about this? Any trail to the holding / management / letting companies? I wouldn't mind trawling through some links to see what I can dig up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the 1920's we go....

difference is now the masses have the internet for information, organisation, and infiltration. Somehow, I don't see game over yet for the huddled masses.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the 1920's we go....

difference is now the masses have the internet for information, organisation, and infiltration. Somehow, I don't see game over yet for the huddled masses.....

The internet can be shut down pretty quickly you know (unless you have sophisticated equipment). One plug out, all gone for the masses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The internet can be shut down pretty quickly you know (unless you have sophisticated equipment). One plug out, all gone for the masses.

Business, banking, politicians, utilities, education and the various forces etc etc etc would also be badly affected as well though. It permeates most everything these days.

Just looking at shopping for some items sometimes even the most basic stuff doesn't seem to be available on the high street stores and is only obtainable via the internet * amazon or ebay etc.

That's not to say that some time in the future they won't try it. Then it might be which country/block of countries gets it back up first benefits most.

*

Mind you it's almost got to the monopoly stage now when some high street operations might think it's worthwhile to set up in the high street in competition - if taxes, rents and land prices etc were reduced.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stated on this forum many times that private equity firms and hedge funds are buying up tens of thousands of vacant houses to sell as single-family rental homes.

There was also an anecdotal evidence (a few years back reported on this forum) that the same thing (City funds are buying 100's of homes in North England through proxies and that they do not ask the price,they just buy) is happening in the UK, and that is one of the reasons why UK house prices have been maintained high and went higher.

Despite all the above, the majority of HPCers seem to disbelieve the above.

I hope that the people will finally wake up.

Sounds like pub BS.

Do you know how much mainteance is involved in letting 100s of homes.

Bets bet would be to build blocks of flats, all regular.

Better bet is to lend to the HAs + people buying the house. Much easier to manage and more lqiuid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

home ownership by those who can afford to buy and maintain the homes has significant advantages. As the old saying goes, No renter ever paid to have a rented car washed and waxed.

What is this? What is the rent money actually paid for then?

Edited by erat_forte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stated on this forum many times that private equity firms and hedge funds are buying up tens of thousands of vacant houses to sell as single-family rental homes.

There was also an anecdotal evidence (a few years back reported on this forum) that the same thing (City funds are buying 100's of homes in North England through proxies and that they do not ask the price,they just buy) is happening in the UK, and that is one of the reasons why UK house prices have been maintained high and went higher.

Despite all the above, the majority of HPCers seem to disbelieve the above.

I hope that the people will finally wake up.

I would be interested in the logic of a business not asking the price & not haggling

Edited by Saving For a Space Ship

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rents are rising in Spain where pirate equity and hedge funds piled into social housing.

I've no doubt it will happen here in the UK too (well it is happening) whoever I vote, or not vote for.

'In order to make money, first capture a State.' ~ SecureTenant 2014

I read a few months ago, that the tenants are now suing the politicians who sold them to the hedge funds

A key problem that faces capitalism is that the rich, because of greed, cannot resist destabilising a system which already benefits them.

The scorpion and the fox (or frog )

"I couldn't help it , it's my nature"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be interested in the logic of a business not asking the price & not haggling

If the City interests see 'fair value' for housing being considerably higher.

..and 'fair value' can be anything you want it to be if you have the power and financial resources to push it there.

See it all the time in FX and indices markets.

Go to an auction and see a professional dealer pay way over the odds, for an old painting? Surely a pro would want to buy at 'trade prices?'

Its because he feels the price will go higher.

Having said that I doubt pro investors can push house prices much higher in parts of the North, unless government can be 'persuaded' to increase its subsidy in the form of housing benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When we lived in Toronto we rented an apartment from a large commercial landlord that owned the entire block and several others. Actually it was a pretty good experience and certainly better than our experience of renting from a BTL landlord in the UK. Main advantages were:

1. Landlord was rational - understood that occupancy levels (satisfied tenants) are key to generating a profit and hence maintenance and services were taken care of promptly. There was a full time office and repairs team so you could get a professional response when you had a question or issue.

2. Landlord understood and complied with the law around landlord/tenant issues - as corporate reputation was important.

3. Landlord keen to keep good tenants, no arbitrary giving of notice "because I've got a friend who wants to move in" so more confidence in security of tenure.

The legal structure in Canada for tenants was also better, rents were set by the market out the outset of your tenancy but thereafter subject to cap on annual increases.

I would much prefer to see financial institutions building new houses/flats for rent than hovering up existing stock - but to be honest if I had to rent I'd rather be renting from a large professional operation focussed on yield and occupancy that an over-leveraged chancer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there anywhere I can read about this? Any trail to the holding / management / letting companies? I wouldn't mind trawling through some links to see what I can dig up.

Property consortium bought London estate

"In 2014, Benton's family firm was part of a property consortium that purchased New Era estate, one of the last affordable housing estates for working-class Londoners. The consortium increased the rents and announced plans to increase them further to match the rest of the market, effectively displacing its current residents.[17] Following negative publicity and protests by the tenants, Benyon Estate announced that it would sell its stake in the consortium back to the landlord, a New York–based property investment company."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Benyon

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prime-minister-grilled-over-tory-3802038

Sounds like pub BS.

Do you know how much mainteance is involved in letting 100s of homes.

Bets bet would be to build blocks of flats, all regular.

Better bet is to lend to the HAs + people buying the house. Much easier to manage and more lqiuid.

It is not pub BS. See the above link which was already reported on this forum.

Do you know how much rent is involved in letting 100's of homes?

So why are also the Wall street funds buying 100's of properties across USA? (That was reported on this forum 2 years ago)

Surely they will find enough QE money to "buy" them, maintain them and let them out.

The end game is sky high house prices which no one can afford apart from the above "funds" and banks from which we can only rent, hence forever dependant debt slaves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be interested in the logic of a business not asking the price & not haggling

They do not think like you and me.They have the licence to invent the money hence it does not cost them anything to "buy" (or maintain) these properties.

Also, they can easily carry on "investing" even if they have no profit (after maintenance/managing costs are deducted from the rent money) simply because they - invent the virtual money.

The same way also the banks can operate indefinitely even if they charge 0% on their loans/mortgages because borrowers still have to pay back the principal sum which was created out of nothing on the computer.

That is the very reason why a friend of mine was offered (by the mortgage broker) more than 6x salary multiple (salary £30k offered £190k ) just a few days ago on a teaser interest rate.So much for MMR rules!

They know that he will never be able to pay it off, but he would happily exchange his labour for a virtual money offered by the bank for the rest of his life.

Their virtual money (including QE) needs to be parked somewhere.

All the above are reasons why there are lower and lower yields anywhere you invest, whilst the house prices go up all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They always used to claim that the banks were only really interested in banking and weren't interested in directly owning or letting houses, too much hassle.

Maybe that's changed. If the oil's running out maybe they want to have solid assets (land and housing) now. Ultimately bankers' objective would be for them (and their cronies) to directly own the world (land) rather than just shuffling paper/digits around.

Maybe that point has come and loading huge numbers of students with massive debt is just part of that.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They always used to claim that the banks were only really interested in banking and weren't interested in directly owning or letting houses, too much hassle.

Maybe that's changed. If the oil's running out maybe they want to have solid assets (land and housing) now. Ultimately bankers' objective would be for them (and their cronies) to directly own the world (land) rather than just shuffling paper/digits around.

Maybe that point has come and loading huge numbers of students with massive debt is just part of that.

Spot on. It is not that they want to own just houses.They own metal market ( Coca cola sued Goldman sachs for manipulating price of aluminium by creating artificial lack of aluminium), oil tankers which dock only when there is lack of oil on the mainland,...

Rolling Stone website stated all the above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the City interests see 'fair value' for housing being considerably higher.

..and 'fair value' can be anything you want it to be if you have the power and financial resources to push it there.

See it all the time in FX and indices markets.

Go to an auction and see a professional dealer pay way over the odds, for an old painting? Surely a pro would want to buy at 'trade prices?'

Its because he feels the price will go higher.

Having said that I doubt pro investors can push house prices much higher in parts of the North, unless government can be 'persuaded' to increase its subsidy in the form of housing benefit.

HS3?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   203 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.