Page 778 of 860 FirstFirst ... 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 ... LastLast
Results 19,426 to 19,450 of 21488
  1. #19426
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Mayonnaisium
    Posts
    9,326
    Another thing about STRs is their predominant location in desirable areas (duh) so even a small percent of the total can have an outsized impact.

  2. #19427
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    7,544
    Quote Originally Posted by Yukonrider View Post
    As much as I hate to say it, I agree with this. I believe pretty choking regulations of STRs will help ease the housing shortage. And not taxes those just increases prices, what I've seen work to some degree is city wide caps if not bans.

    My libertarian beliefs, and desire to own STRs as an investor directly contradict the above though, so don't yell at me too much.
    I'm pretty libertarian too, but homes should not be hotels, and neighborhoods should be communities not resort complexes.

    I am cool with STR in high density condos, and I think a lot of resort towns (like mine) should encourage as many of those as possible. Give people the dream of having a weekend place in the mountains. Lets cut the sprawl and get some high rises in our mountain and lake towns.

    But save SFH for people, families and the community.

  3. #19428
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    4,081
    STRs really squeeze the rental market in resort areas.
    You’re welcome,
    Captain Obvious

  4. #19429
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    your vacation
    Posts
    3,404
    Quote Originally Posted by Self Jupiter View Post
    STRs really squeeze the rental market in resort areas.
    You’re welcome,
    Captain Obvious
    It is and isn't kinda an urban myth to some degree

    I was getting ready to rail against a bunch of local bullshit then they invited me up to 3rd floor hate when they do that to me small towns suck gotta watch what you say

  5. #19430
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    7,544
    Quote Originally Posted by Self Jupiter View Post
    STRs really squeeze the rental market in resort areas.
    You’re welcome,
    Captain Obvious
    Yup. "Oh we love this town, let's buy an airbnb!" 5 years later, after 90% of the affordable housing inventory is locked in STRs "Wow, I can't believe the ski resort can't get employees! They should build affordable housing for them!"

  6. #19431
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    关你屁事
    Posts
    6,191
    Quote Originally Posted by skaredshtles View Post
    I mean... it can't *hurt* - but how many joints are actually STR's compared with the total? Is it really enough to make any difference? Or is it just a drop in the bucket?
    the Bloomberg link upthread had ~9% of the single family homes in the us converting to investor/rental property in the past decade. That’s a hefty chunk of the market.

  7. #19432
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Keep Tacoma Feared
    Posts
    3,296
    9% of homes in US are short term rentals?

    In simple macroeconomic terms, price is where supply meets demand. So you add a small amount of supply by ending short term rentals, prices should marginally go down. But what about the demand for short term rentals? Hotels aren't exactly hurting right now, and can't absorb that demand. The only solution is to build more housing, particularly small, dense, cheap housing.

  8. #19433
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,977
    Ahahahaha, they bumped the price from $550k to $600k. Getting kind of close to giving up on moving to B'ham.


    Quote Originally Posted by dan_pdx View Post
    3 bedroom Rambler in the Happy Valley Neighborhood. This home borders the Happy Valley Park to the back of the property and west side. Large 12,400 sf flat lot with an open back yard. This home has solid bones and is in need of some well deserved cosmetic TLC.

    If "cosmetic TLC" means "nuke it from space and behead the remains" then I agree.

    https://www.redfin.com/WA/Bellingham.../home/15835947

    Attachment 401042

    Attachment 401041

  9. #19434
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    10,919
    Quote Originally Posted by altasnob View Post
    9% of homes in US are short term rentals?

    In simple macroeconomic terms, price is where supply meets demand. So you add a small amount of supply by ending short term rentals, prices should marginally go down. But what about the demand for short term rentals? Hotels aren't exactly hurting right now, and can't absorb that demand. The only solution is to build more housing, particularly small, dense, cheap housing.
    Investor/ rentals are not always STRs

  10. #19435
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    1,186
    “It’s not selling, what could be wrong?”
    “Well, at this price point and based on the area’s comps, it might be priced too low and prospective buyers probably think something is seriously wrong with the house. Let’s trying raising the price and see if we get some showings.”


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  11. #19436
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Keep Tacoma Feared
    Posts
    3,296
    Quote Originally Posted by Name Redacted View Post
    Investor/ rentals are not always STRs
    That's why I was questioning that number. I can't find a quick answer to what percentage of homes in America are short term rentals. But I can't imagine it is enough that banning them would dramatically change home prices on a national scale. And banning them would fuck with the economy is so many other ways. Whether it is a ski town or a major city, tourism and short term stays are a major part of the economy. You try to solve one problem but don't really solve it and instead create another problem.

    Others have mentioned there are success stories in communities that have banned short term rentals. I am curious where those success stories are?

  12. #19437
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    LV-426
    Posts
    19,193
    Quote Originally Posted by Benny Profane View Post
    No, I call him lucky. But, he still lives in Reno.
    Bless your heart.
    Quote Originally Posted by powder11 View Post
    if you have to resort to taking advice from the nitwits on this forum, then you're doomed.

  13. #19438
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Denial
    Posts
    2,259
    Quote Originally Posted by altasnob View Post

    Others have mentioned there are success stories in communities that have banned short term rentals. I am curious where those success stories are?
    I think the successes are less obvious, and affect the lower earners more. Much of the housing stock that got turned into STRs used to be LTRs, LTRs that housed folks who are unable or unwilling to buy, your service industry types, or in ski towns your lifties, or young home buyers.

    While banning STRs would shift the demand onto hotels there by increasing the value of that commodity, you would increase housing available to the lower income folks, who are by and large being displaced currently with reverberating consequences in small communities. Larger towns are better insulated from this.

    The changes wouldn't dramatically change home prices, but they would open up spaces to renters that isn't currently available.

    And yes, the good long term answer is build more housing, but until you can undo years of restrictive zoning, asinine permitting processes, and lucrative tax streams, not to mention NIMBYisim from the boomers with money that's a pipe dream even further from reality than banning STRs.
    The whole human race is de evolving; it is due to birth control, smart people use birth control, and stupid people keep pooping out more stupid babies.

  14. #19439
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Big in Japan
    Posts
    50,341
    The average American outside of trophy cities is unaffected by STRs. This is such a TGR bro problem in their trust fundy world.

    The world is perfect. Appreciate the details.

  15. #19440
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    10,919
    Quote Originally Posted by Benny Profane View Post
    The average American outside of trophy cities is unaffected by STRs. This is such a TGR bro problem in their trust fundy world.
    WTF is a trophy city? Why do STRs need to affect the "Average American" to become an issue?

  16. #19441
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    your vacation
    Posts
    3,404
    Quote Originally Posted by Benny Profane View Post
    The average American outside of trophy cities is unaffected by STRs. This is such a TGR bro problem in their trust fundy world.
    benny with the solid
    03 was a good year to buy property in a trophy city bro


    Quote Originally Posted by muted reborn View Post
    Like what? I don't see shit to buy there - 12 houses for sale now roughly in the county. Or is it all coming down the pipeline?

    .
    it's been proposed a number of times by developer speculator types
    they don't have any water or sewer so when these clowns talk a big talk then start actually adding up the cost of infrastructure it doesn't work out
    a family in summit county (not local, but they pretend to be) has owned a lot of land for a long time, they fought tooth and nail for a 100 unit development and finally got it, well that was almost ten years ago and they have yet to break ground cause the morons didn't realize a bank wasn't going to hand them 10 million just to build roads water and sewer and power

  17. #19442
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    9,300ft
    Posts
    19,860
    So if refiing best to lock a rate immediately or are there any downward fluctuations anticipated?
    Quote Originally Posted by blurred
    skiing is hiking all day so that you can ski on shitty gear for 5 minutes.

  18. #19443
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    In a van... down by the river
    Posts
    9,641
    Quote Originally Posted by fastfred View Post
    <snip>
    they don't have any water or sewer so when these clowns talk a big talk then start actually adding up the cost of infrastructure it doesn't work out
    a family in summit county (not local, but they pretend to be) has owned a lot of land for a long time, they fought tooth and nail for a 100 unit development and finally got it, well that was almost ten years ago and they have yet to break ground cause the morons didn't realize a bank wasn't going to hand them 10 million just to build roads water and sewer and power
    Why don't we make the taxpayers pay for it??


  19. #19444
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    11,136
    Quote Originally Posted by dan_pdx View Post
    Ahahahaha, they bumped the price from $550k to $600k. Getting kind of close to giving up on moving to B'ham.
    That place has been the talk of the town. It was owner occupied for years (rumor is old lady and her adult kid(s) and when mom passed the son lived there). I guess the guy had some troubles, the place fell into disrepair, and was eventually foreclosed upon by the bank. A foreign buyer bought the property as an investment, and intentionally left it empty. Meanwhile, squatters moved in. He's tried to sell it privately a few times to no avail, but now that the value of the dirt has exceeded his purchase price, he's apparently ok with paying a commission.

    Predatory capitalism at its finest.

    And the agent deserves an honorable mention in the breathless bullshit dept. The building is clearly a tear down, but the value of a 13k lot within city limits is probably a half million at this point. Subdividing to flag lot the back portion, and building two SFRs both with ADUs wouldn't be all that difficult. Someone with some wherewithal - and deep pockets - could probably get a rezone and build apartments.

  20. #19445
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Keep Tacoma Feared
    Posts
    3,296
    Quote Originally Posted by Name Redacted View Post
    WTF is a trophy city? Why do STRs need to affect the "Average American" to become an issue?
    Because it doesn't matter if (insert ski town/trophy city of your choosing) becomes more affordable by banning short term rentals if the rest of America is still unaffordable (they'll all move to this new suddenly affordable oasis).

    You can't ban short term rentals at the national level (zoning is controlled by local and state governments). So we have the current status quo, where one little bourgeoisie ski town bans short term rentals, but the towns down the road don't. The net effect is zero change in housing prices. It's just shuffling around the winners and losers without moving the needle (similar to rent control).

    I still can't figure out exactly how many short term rentals there are in America, but over 2 million is a reasonable guesstimate. Banning short term rentals doesn't make this demand go away. You would need to build 2 million non-short term rental places to absorb this demand. Which comes back to my main point, we need more housing built. I have nothing against increasing high rise hotel supply, but that construction faces the same impediments as does small, dense, multi-family housing. Red tape, high cost of land and construction, NIMBY's, ect.

  21. #19446
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    11,136
    Really, wages need to rise.

  22. #19447
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    16,738
    Quote Originally Posted by Summit View Post
    So if refiing best to lock a rate immediately or are there any downward fluctuations anticipated?
    Your guess is as good as anyone's else's out there as they can fluctuate a little as they march higher.
    Name:  Screenshot 2022-01-21 093712.png
Views: 195
Size:  17.2 KB
    Quote Originally Posted by leroy jenkins View Post
    I think you'd have an easier time understanding people if you remembered that 80% of them are fucking morons.
    That is why I like dogs, more than most people.

  23. #19448
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Keep Tacoma Feared
    Posts
    3,296
    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
    Really, wages need to rise.
    But the government can't snap their fingers and make wages go up. The only thing the government can do in this is cut out the red tape and tell NIMBY's to eat a dick so we can bring down new construction costs, and incentivize new development (preferably centrally located, small, dense, development that will actually have an affect on supply).

  24. #19449
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    11,136
    uhm... the government can snap their fingers and make wages go up, but they won't.

    But it's going to happen either way. If you aren't willing to pay $20/hr in this town you won't get any applicants.

    We definitely fell way behind on building because money dried up after the financial meltdown, and I agree that incentivizing density/disincentivizing sprawl would be the smart thing, but this country is so "I got mine so fuck you" I don't see any meaningful change on that front. Especially where the wealthy control the local government.

  25. #19450
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    10,919
    Quote Originally Posted by Summit View Post
    So if refiing best to lock a rate immediately or are there any downward fluctuations anticipated?
    Now is the time. You might catch a dip if you are lucky but the overall trend will probably be up for the foreseeable future. Talk to a mortgage broker and get an application rolling then jump on the lowest rate in a short time period.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •