Skip to main content

Control Your Money, Not Vice Versa

A few weeks ago, I wrote a post very similar to this - in fact, some aspects are identical - but I'm putting a slightly different twist on it to alter the perspective by a tad.  

Whenever I meet a real estate investor who likes to take the fix-n-flip approach, I always ask why they go that route rather than subscribe to a buy-n-hold approach.  There are different answers to that question, but they all seem to have a common thread running through all of them: "I need the money to go out and buy another house to flip."  Sure, most people have a limited supply of cash on hand, so that makes sense.  With that said, there are three options EVERY real estate investor should know about - but, usually, they only know about the first one.  Let me set this up:

Real-life example: the property in question costs $77,000 to acquire and $18,000 to rehab (total cash put out equals $95,000).  The property then can sell for $135,000.  Ready?

Traditional Fix-n-Flip
• $135,000 Sell price
• Get back total $95K put out (acquisition & rehab)
• $17,225 Profit (after costs of sale & short-term capital gains taxes)
• 18.1% ROI

Immediate Cash Out (0-6 months)*
• $135,000 Appraised Value
• Get back $77K
• Earn $435/mo in passive income
• 29% ROI in the first year
• No short-term capital gains taxes

Delayed Cash Out (Wait 6 months)**
• $135,000 Appraised Value
• Get back $101,250
• Earn $295/mo in passive income
• ROI is INFINITE – In 6 months, $6,250 in profit
• No short-term capital gains taxes

Any questions?  Sure, some of you are probably wondering how I came up with some of the numbers outlined in the scenarios listed above.  Buckle up, because here we go:

Traditional Fix-n-Flip Option
The costs of the sale tend to be approximately 10% of the sell price.  In this case that would be $13,500 – these costs consist of commissions, seller’s costs, and concessions.  After subtracting out the costs of the sale ($13,500), the cost of acquisition ($77,000), and the costs of the rehab ($18,000), there’s a profit of $26,500 of which 35% ($9,275) will go to short-term capital gains taxes for an overall net profit of $17,225.  Dividing $17,225 by $95,000 (the costs of acquisition and rehab) yields an ROI of 18.1%. 

PROS 
  • all costs were recouped
  • a net profit of $17,225 was made
  • there’s no further obligation  
CON
  • no property has been retained that may appreciate in value

*Immediate-Cash-Out Option
Once the work on the house has been completed, an appraisal is ordered, and it comes back at $135,000.  The property can be refinanced at that point up to 100% of the acquisition cost, which is $77,000 in this case.  The monthly mortgage payment of $465 is based on a conventional fixed 30-year mortgage at 3.875% (4.893% APR).  The difference between $900 (the projected rental rate) and $465 is $435.  Multiplying $435 by 12 yields $5,220 in annual profit.  Dividing $5,220 by $18,000 (which was the investment in this case – the rehab costs) yields an ROI of 29% for the first year.  

PROS
  • a property has been retained that may appreciate in value
  • the cost of acquisition was recouped
  • avoid short-term capital gains taxes
  • no sales costs
  • an income-generating property has been established

CON
  • a mortgage requires obligation

**Delayed-Cash-Out Option
Six months after work on the house has been completed, an appraisal is ordered, and it comes back at $135,000.  The property can be refinanced at that point up to 75% of the new appraised value, which is $101,250 in this case.  The monthly mortgage payment of $605 is based on a conventional fixed 30-year mortgage at 3.875% (4.893% APR).  The all-in costs for this property were $77,000 for acquisition and $18,000 for rehab, for a total of $95,000.  The difference between what can be pulled out in the refinance ($101,250) and the all-in costs ($95,000) is $6,250 in PROFIT.  Because the money available to pull out through refinance is greater than the all-in costs, the ROI is infinite. 

PROS
  • a property has been retained that may appreciate in value
  • the costs of acquisition and rehab have been fully recouped with a profit
  • avoid short-term capital gains taxes
  • no sales costs
  • an income-generating property has been established

CON
  • a mortgage requires obligation
Everyone has a different set of circumstances and needs, and they change as life events and other things take place, which means that no one option above is better than the other.  They each have their advantages and drawbacks - it's up to you to decide which strategy you want to pursue, and you may implement a different strategy for different properties and for different goals.  And that's the reason I wanted to line out the three options - it's kind of hard to exercise an option if you don't know it exists.  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Posted August 31, 2015

Fast . . . So They’re Not Furious InSellerate , a lead-generation company, conducted a study that yielded some very interesting insights: •    32% of consumers expect a company to respond to an online inquiry within 30 minutes •    42% of consumers expect contact within one hour •    M ore than half of the companies studied (56.34%) did not respond to the online or email inquiry at all Of those companies that did respond, the average response time exceeded 24 hours, and the primary response vehicle was email, which is a passive, relatively non-effective method of contact .   The take-away thought from all of this is “no kidding”, of course, but it underscores the wisdom that a lead is only as good as the work you put into it. Safety Over Sales According to a USA Today article, realtors in Iowa are taking steps to ensure the safety of all agents. The initiative includes an optional seller contract that prohibits any agent from ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Rates are Overrated

Buckle up and get ready to have your mind blown!   Okay, it’s not THAT mind blowing – some of you might even say, “well, duh” – but it’s still interesting. The economists (that’s a fancy term for “the smart folks”) at the New York Federal Reserve published the results of a study, which reveal that changes in down payment requirements have MORE influence over home buyers’ willingness to buy than changes in rates.   Follow me on this – you’ll be glad you did! Surveying both buyers and renters, those smarty pants at the Fed found that the effect of interest rates may be overrated when compared to changes in down payment requirements.   The study found: • Dropping the down payment from 20% to 5% INCREASES the willingness to purchase, on average, by 15% among buyers and 40% among renters • Decreasing the interest rate on a 30-year fixed-rate loan only raised the willingness to purchase by 5%, on average If you’re straddling the fence between BUY RIG...
Post a Comment
Read more

Perspective Produces Progress

Each week I try to write something that will either make you think about a rather humdrum mortgage/real estate topic in a new way or at least clear the cerebral cobwebs.   Admittedly, some weeks I’m better at accomplishing that than others – my apologies for those “off” weeks.   As I’ve been trying to come up with a topic for this week’s missive, it’s not so much that I’ve been hitting a brick wall that’s been keeping me from inspiration, it’s that I’ve felt sort of “dragged down” by so many things that have been happening here in our own backyard over the past few weeks that have been . . . less than inspiring.   It seems that wherever you turn – TV, radio, Facebook, Instagram , newspapers (they still exist) – one party isn’t happy unless the opposing party is proven wrong and/or devastated.   I’m not advocating the philosophy that “everyone’s a winner and should get a trophy just for showing up” – I’m an advocate of just the opposite when it comes to c...
Post a Comment
Read more