The midst of a pandemic might not seem like the best time to invest
in anything. In fact, for many, this is a time to take whatever money
they can find and to stuff it under the mattress.
Some specialists, however, see opportunity were others see threat. One of those is Clint Coons, a founding partner of Anderson Law Group, an arm of Anderson Legal, Business & Tax Advisors.
The company has offices in Washington, Nevada, Wyoming and Utah; Coons
is currently the manager of Anderson’s office in Tacoma, Washington.
“Right now, from an investment standpoint, there are lots of deals to be had,” he says. “Especially if you are a cash buyer.”
Although the stock market has performed well in recent years, it is volatile and unpredictable, Coons says.
“There have been huge swings, which means that, one day you have lots of money and the next day, you have none. But while the value of real estate assets will also recede, there are many more factors in play. When property markets lessen, there are more renters, for example,” he adds.
Coons believes that an excellent way to monetize the current real
estate landscape is with “Subject To” investments. “Subject to”
investing is a method of purchasing property that leaves the seller’s
loan in place. In essence, it allows the buyer to purchase real estate
without getting new financing for the property – he or she is buying
real estate that is “subject to” the existing debt.
“When times are uncertain, people get scared and are open to things
they might not have considered before,” says Coons. “In January, I was
negotiating with a seller in New York for a multi-family building, and
it was going nowhere. By late February, the seller could not handle the
stress. He reached out to me and we negotiated a sale in which I took
over the mortgage. I will pay it and keep it in his name for two years,
then we will change the terms and complete the transaction.”
He suggests that this is an excellent time for cash buyers to comb
the MLS listings for properties that have been sitting on the market for
“For borrowers, things go very slowly. But cash buyers can move things along quickly with “subject to” investing.”
Today, Coons believes that single-family properties are a good investment.
“Multi-family will be more complicated,” he says, citing rent
abeyances offered by a number of municipalities and state governments in
response to the corona virus.
Geographically, he suggests that investors stay away from the coasts.
“Especially in California, they are almost socialistic in the way
they go after landlords. That is also true in the northeast, and it
makes it too risky to invest. Also, real estate values are so inflated
in those areas that it’s hard to enter the market in the first place.
“Look to the interior,” he adds. “Texas always offers good
opportunities for investing, although pockets like Austin have become
less affordable. North Carolina, too, is a very good real estate
How will potential real estate investors know that the window of opportunity has closed?
“When people no longer accept your offer,” says Coons.
Do deals while you sleep. ZERO tech skills needed.
In an era of automation and improved technology to help you get your best deals conquered with zero knowledge required with advanced technology — this will definitely give you an edge in getting your way to success! By using technology and automation as a tool to find people who are highly motivated sellers and real estate agents.
This new technology allows you to create an automation process that is super easy to follow. And if you are one of those people who “are not into technology,” don’t worry, the ease of access with this user-friendly interface that is being introduced will have you changing your tune about technology.
This automated tool is called Bots, “Imagine if a website funnel and an email marketer met on Facebook and had a love child,” it's a wide variety of based to communicate. A system that allows you to connect with seamless communication between buyer and seller and will let you take advantage of automation. Employment competition between automation and manual labor will never be a big deal but should work hand in hand, and people shall take advantage of using it.
Matt Leitz, the Founder, and CEO of BotBuilders, provided tips on how to capitalize with automation and technology, how the automation process will help sellers to close deals and buyers to fight for their deals and most of all to save hours of work using this technology. Sellers are spending Time dealing with buyers to make sure to get the deal. But what if you can interactively deal with multiple buyers without spending too much time? You will have a higher chance of getting an increase in your success rate in selling than manually responding and conversing with each of the inquiries. Doesn't that sound like a dream come true?
Considering this kind of technology, one must decide whether they want this automation and help from the expert team of BotBuilders.
There are three ways of becoming a BotBuilder; with these, there is no reason that you will not get the best result to get your success.
#1 Misconception about Bots: Bots are not to replace humans; hence it will filter unwanted conversation and create more profitable and productive conversations. People get answers faster than spending too much time without getting anywhere.
#2 Misconception about Bots: This is not Artificial Intelligence, Bots intended to create Awesome Interactions using conversational marketing. This builds a more interactive conversation way better than a regular transactional inquiry.
#3 Misconception about Bots: You do not need to be tech-savvy, this will ease your mind, Bots are fun using ManyChat, and there is no coding or experience required! Where one of its features will make you sound like and look professional using the deal negotiating robot and will create an impression with your buyers and clients. And no matter who you are, you can do this.
Based on the recent reports, Facebook topped the social media platforms used by U.S. adults as a messaging tool, including advertisements and promotions.
There are roughly 1.5 billion active Facebook Messenger users, and 80% of Americans use messenger apps regularly. Messenger app messages are 5 times more than the regular text messages, and business messages grew four times in a year since 56% prefer messenger over the phone with businesses.
To help you see the difference between the regular platforms and communication with the buyers and client, a comparison below is presented:
Also, with the features that Bots offer Instagram, iMessage, Whatsapp, and RCS will be included. That means more communication and messaging platforms will be part of the system and will get more ways to communicate with buyers and clients.
The increasing rate of subscribers opted in and find the best results, with the recent reports presented by BotBuilders from 25,000 to 150,000 subscribers are now investing and gaining with this tool and evidently increase their success rate from 50% to 70%.
There are two resources you need to work on it. We need to identify which is essential Time Vs. Money. The Freedom of flexibility which is one of the benefits of getting this technology, spending more on your personal life rather than getting most of it working hard. Saving Time is saving money, spending money to save time will help you gain more deals, and increase your rate of success.
Proposes changes to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule
Just over two years after it first began chipping away at a controversial fair housing rule issued by the Obama administration in 2015, the Trump administration announced Tuesday that it is issuing a wholly new Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule.
In 2017, Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson said that HUD will look to “reinterpret” the Obama administration’s AFFH rule, which required cities and towns receiving federal funding to examine their local housing patterns for racial bias and to design a plan to address any measurable bias.
Since then, HUD has taken several steps to delay and/or alter the AFFH rule, including delaying the deadline for local governments to submit their fair housing evaluations by one year and killing a computer program that local governments were supposed to use to submit their relevant housing data to assure compliance with the AFFH rule.
But now, HUD is moving away from the Obama administration’s version of the AFFH entirely and proposing its own version of the rule.
According to HUD, the newly proposed rule “offers clearer guidance to states and local governments to help them improve affordable housing choices in their community.”
In a statement, HUD Secretary Ben Carson indicates that the Trump administration’s new rule removes the federal mandate to address systemic housing discrimination and places control over local housing efforts with officials in those cities and towns.
“HUD’s commitment to Fair Housing remains as steadfast as ever before, and this improved rule reaffirms our mission of giving people more affordable housing options in communities across the country,” Carson said.
“By fixing the old Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule, localities now have the flexibility to devise housing plans that fit their unique needs and provide families with more housing choices within their reach,” Carson continued.
“Mayors know their communities best, so we are empowering them to make housing decisions that meet their unique needs, not a mandate from the federal government,” Carson added. “Having said that, if a community fails to improve housing choice, HUD stands ready to enforce the Fair Housing Act and pursue action against any party that violates the law.”
In its proposed rule, HUD lays out its vision for how the AFFH rule should function:
HUD believes that fair housing choice exists when a jurisdiction can foster the broad availability of affordable housing that is decent, safe, and sanitary and does so without housing discrimination. To that end, HUD is proposing to evaluate how program participants are carrying out their AFFH obligation as a threshold matter by using a series of data-based measures to determine whether a jurisdiction (1) is free of adjudicated fair housing claims; (2) has an adequate supply of affordable housing throughout the jurisdiction; and (3) has an adequate supply of quality affordable housing.
HUD’s new rule also redefines what the phrase “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” means in the government’s view:
The current regulation defines AFFH as “taking meaningful actions that, taken together, address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity, replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, and fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws.”
HUD proposes changing the definition of AFFH to “advancing fair housing choice within the program participant’s control or influence.” HUD is proposing a definition of “fair housing choice” to be allowing “individuals and families [to] have the opportunity and options to live where they choose, within their means, without unlawful discrimination related to race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or disability.”
The changes to the AFFH rule are by far the most sweeping action taken towards the AFFH rule by the Trump administration thus far.
The efforts to change the AFFH rule began in January 2018 when HUD announced that it was delaying the deadline for local governments to submit their fair housing evaluations.
But delaying the fair housing evaluations, which were required as part of the AFFH rule, essentially “gutted” the AFFH rule, according to former HUD Secretary Julián Castro, who oversaw the rule’s announcement in 2015.
HUD later killed the Local Government Assessment Tool, which HUD claimed was “confusing, difficult to use, and frequently produced unacceptable assessments.”
HUD efforts to change the AFFH rule were challenged in court by fair housing advocates, including the National Fair Housing Alliance, Texas Appleseed, and Texas Low Income Housing Information Service, which asked for a judge to require HUD to enforce the AFFH rule as originally established.
But the judge overseeing the case eventually threw out the housing groups’ case, stating that they did not prove that they were harmed by HUD’s actions.
With the court’s decision in its back pocket, HUD moved forward with its plan to “streamline” the AFFH rule by inviting comments from the public and industry participants on how best to enforce fair housing regulations.
HUD said Tuesday that it received more than 700 public comments in response.
According to HUD, many of those expressed support for the 2015 rule and urged HUD to continue to implement its requirements.
“These commenters cited the need for a way to enforce the AFFH requirement and cited the significant use of resources and public input that went into the creation of the 2015 rule,” HUD said in its new rule. “These commenters found the early results of the rule ‘promising’ and believed that improving the tools would ease the burdens and improve the process.”
But, HUD notes that a “large number” of commenters opposed the 2015 rule. “Some objected to the idea entirely, citing concerns for local control of zoning,” HUD said. “Others felt that the requirements of the rule were too onerous, specifically the level of public participation needed and the scope of data that program participants were required to address.”
According to HUD, these new changes are necessary for a number of reasons.
“Since the issuance of the 2015 final rule, HUD has determined that the current regulations are overly burdensome to both HUD and grantees and are ineffective in helping program participants meet their reporting obligations for multiple reasons,” HUD said in the proposed rule.
“While some of the burdens are a result of the assessment tools themselves, the tools are closely tied to the regulatory language, which HUD believes is too prescriptive in outcomes for jurisdictions,” HUD continued. “Therefore, HUD believes it is necessary to revise the codified regulation, not just the assessment tools.”
It appears that HUD is taking the carrot, not stick approach for addressing fair housing, seeking to reward cities for their positive efforts rather than punishing them for their lack of effort to address issues.
From the proposed rule:
The Fair Housing Act “does not decree a particular vision of urban development.” HUD aims to take this into account and allow for the flexibility and innovation necessary to best further fair housing nationwide, recognizing that fair housing is an especially difficult and complex policy area because of the competing considerations that go into promoting fair housing and other valid governmental priorities. By proposing to reward jurisdictions that are performing well in their AFFH efforts and improving in ways that will benefit entire communities, HUD will provide incentives to both jurisdictions and the general public to find ways to help local jurisdictions improve their AFFH efforts. By increasing the number of people who benefit from an expansion of fair and affordable housing, HUD expects that a larger share of the local community will be motivated to participate in local discussions on how to AFFH and what strategies are best suited for the locality. Such incentives may encourage citizens and local businesses to participate in important local housing debates when they otherwise may have sat on the sidelines. HUD believes that having buy-in from a broad range of citizens and businesses in a community will result in a stronger AFFH effort and help reduce housing discrimination.
To read the HUD’s new AFFH proposal in full, click here.
San Francisco is now home to the nation's highest rent prices
In January, the rental prices for a one-bedroom and two-bedroom unit decreased from the previous month, falling by 0.4% and 0.3%, respectively, according to Zumper’s National Rent Report.
It now costs the average renter a median of $1,217 and $1,460 to rent the average one-bedroom and two-bedroom units. This equates to an annual decrease of 0.3% and an annual increase of 0.6%, respectively.
“In the first National Rent Report for the year, the top 10 markets saw relatively flat monthly changes but year over year changes were much larger in some cities,” Zumper writes. “Notable markets with large year over year changes included New York, with one- and two-bedroom rents both up around 9%, Washington D.C., with one bedroom rent up 7.6% and two-bedroom rent up 15.2%, and San Diego, with one bedroom rent down over 8%.”
Zumper notes that the nation’s top three rental markets San Francisco, New York and Boston, all experienced notable increases in rental prices from the previous month.
In San Francisco, renters saw their one-bedroom rental prices rise by 0.3% to $3,500, slightly increasing from the previous month’s record, while two-bedroom units held steady at $4,500.
New York renters also experienced an increase in their rent, as prices for one-bedrooms grew by 1% to $3,000. Meanwhile, two bedrooms fell to $3,390.
Rent in Boston climbed by 3.6% to $2,590 for one-bedrooms, while prices for two-bedroom units declined by 0.7% to $2,930.
According to Zumper, Des Moines, Iowa had the fastest growth rate for one-bedroom units as rent increased by 4.9% to $860, moving the city up to the 70th priciest rental market in the nation.
On the other end of the spectrum, Zumper says one-bedroom units in Laredo, Texas had the largest monthly decline rate, as prices fell by 5.3% to $710. On an annual basis, rent prices for one-bedroom units are down 14.5% in the city.
The chart below displays the 25 most expensive rental markets and how they moved in September, according to Zumper.
NOTE: The Zumper National Rent Report analyzes rental data from over 1 million active listings across the country. Data is aggregated on a monthly basis to calculate median asking rents for the top 100 metro areas by population.