There doesn’t need to be a connection between the purchase and sale events. Any marginal unit of inventory added to a market will place downward pressure on the price of that inventory (i.e., make it more affordable). The reverse is true for a marginal bid for inventory.
The effect is so minimal when you zoom into a single sale of one home and purchase of one condo, but in aggregate this causes real noticeable price movement.
It was a series of studies earlier this year that made media rounds; searching for “Wall street housing 25%” returns a myriad of results from mainstream sources citing a number of different studies and papers:
I’m on mobile and can’t dig into total ownership figures at the moment, but I do know that in the sunbelt states property acquisition by investment firms has been a real issue. Even slumlords are getting bought out at top dollar, and affordable housing is increasingly just a trailer rented on land owned by - you guessed it - PE or REITs at consistently inflating rents.
Is this housing that they are purchasing just being sat on? I would think that these are being purchased to be rented out (thereby still increasing housing supply), not just held. Homes are depreciating assets.
In the sunbelt, they buy it, jack up rents, evict tenants, and basically turbocharge being a slumlord until they find new buyers for more than what they paid. Due to supply constraints, they often succeed in this process (which repeats under new landlords) multiple times before the market becomes too pricey and further increases aren’t tolerated (which is why organization is on the rise - the rent is too damn high for no valid reason). On paper, yes, the homes should devalue, but take a look at places like New England where absolute shitholes can fetch half a million dollars and it becomes clear that property depreciation is happening far slower than pricing inflation.
That isn't a study, its just an article in fortune that says
> Nearly 27% of all homes sold in the first three months of the year were bought by investors
That isn't PE firms, it's all investors meaning anyone who isn't planning on living in the home. Most investors are regular people who own 2-3 properties.
Curious for a source on the sq footage per capita if you wouldn’t mind sharing. That’s very interesting.
Could that also be explained perhaps by the fact that people are willing to live farther away from cities (where land / homes are cheaper and larger) because they only have to work 3 days a week from the office? Or because commuting is less painful with newer cars?
Square footage per capita can be misleading because it goes up as an area moves from low density to medium density, but goes down as the same area moves to high density.
Square footage of land != square footage of real estate. A stack of apartments is high density, but each resident could enjoy more square footage than if they were crammed into a single family home with a ton of roommates.
I dont have sources, but the trend for larger houses was happening much earlier than the WfH trend.
It's a mix of car culture, proprty value being lower farther away from cities so develops can create a high margin on building neighborhoods marketed on big, new houses.
Starlink isn't above government laws the same way how Youtbe, Apple, Google, Facebook and your ISP aren't. If the EU/UK/Australian governments say 'jump', these companies will say 'how high' or face criminal charges. They aren't gonna die on a hill and go to jail to protect your anonymity and privacy when the armed law enforcement show up at their offices with subpoenas. Their business and freedom is more important than your privacy.
You need to talk to push for change in your democratic government, not try to find technical workarounds around government tyranny while going on with your day as if what your government is doing is normal.
sure, why not? I'm not saying that I personally could, but the entire network of starlink satellites is owned by one person. Interesting to think about the possibilities at the very least
Scientifically analyzing a phenomenon to break down its underlying principles and optimize it is a sign of capability, the one attribute found to be equally cool and good. And can be quite cool in some contexts.
This honestly may as well have been a paid ad by Amazon. It served as a reminder for me that Prime Day is coming up. That reminder was followed up with several extremely weak arguments that Amazon is the pinnacle of evil. Also felt like it was written largely by AI
https://www.oaktreecapital.com/insights/memo/the-calculus-of...
reply