Condo Rental Protitable ?

[Mr_Gadow]

Hi All,

I've been viewing this forum now for a couple of years but never seen anything specific about the idea of purchasing a couple of condos then renting them out to live of the income.

I already have house & car in Thailand and my budget is approx 8M Baht. Do any members have any experience or recommendations with specific reference to:

#1) Purchase one condo at the top end of my budget or maybe split it into 3 chunks of say 2.5M each per condo ?

#2) What is the typical occupancy percentage over the year ?

#3) I am thinking of Jomtien but what about Phuket or even BKK ?

#4) What pitfalls have other members experienced

Thanks in advance for any *constructive* contributions

Mr_Gadow

[OldAsiaHand]

Two thoughts.....

First, just do the math and you'll forget the whole idea. If you include realistic allowances for vacancies, commissions, maintenance et al, you will find that the cash flow yield from rentals is poor, seldom more than 5% unless you are very, very lucky.

Second, while in most sensible countries you can count on a capital gain from the sale of the property eventually to boost that yield to a respectable level, that's not the case here. Selling what Thais insist on calling 'used property' is a very dicey affair. While I realize that some people manage to sell residential property sucessfully, on the whole, the residential maket here is fairly illiquid, nothing at all like in the US or Europe.

When you buy residential property here you have to accept that you may never be able to sell it again. Why do you think there is so much residential property for rent? Because Thais generally don't even try to sell apartments or homes they are moving out of. They just put them up for rent.

[toastwars]

Hi All,

I've been viewing this forum now for a couple of years but never seen anything specific about the idea of purchasing a couple of condos then renting them out to live of the income.

I already have house & car in Thailand and my budget is approx 8M Baht. Do any members have any experience or recommendations with specific reference to:

#1) Purchase one condo at the top end of my budget or maybe split it into 3 chunks of say 2.5M each per condo ?

#2) What is the typical occupancy percentage over the year ?

#3) I am thinking of Jomtien but what about Phuket or even BKK ?

#4) What pitfalls have other members experienced

Thanks in advance for any *constructive* contributions 

Mr_Gadow

Occupancy rates anywhere in Bangkok are increadably low. Not a good Idea even going high end is awash with competition

[Digger]

Hi All,

I've been viewing this forum now for a couple of years but never seen anything specific about the idea of purchasing a couple of condos then renting them out to live of the income.

I already have house & car in Thailand and my budget is approx 8M Baht. Do any members have any experience or recommendations with specific reference to:

#1) Purchase one condo at the top end of my budget or maybe split it into 3 chunks of say 2.5M each per condo ?

#2) What is the typical occupancy percentage over the year ?

#3) I am thinking of Jomtien but what about Phuket or even BKK ?

#4) What pitfalls have other members experienced

Thanks in advance for any *constructive* contributions 

Mr_Gadow

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have looked at condo investments time and time again in the Jomtien/Pattaya area but have always walked away for the following reasons:

1. The condo's where corporate ex-pats would live are already very expensive. For example Royal Cliff, Saranchol.

2. The yields from these types of condo's are very low - you will struggle to exceed 3/4% even assuming you have 2 year contracted tennant - why because the market rate for these condo's is set already. Typical rent in a Royal Cliff 3 bedroom condo is around 60,000 per month. But for that you need to spend 12,000,000 baht buying it and then putting in furniture, re-decorating etc. Then you have to buy agents commission of one month per year to find you a tenant. So your 60,000 baht x 12 = 720,000 minus one month so 660,000 baht. Less condo fee's - say 22 baht per square meter in 200 sq m apartment = deduction of another 52,800. So now your down to 608,000 per annum. Now factor in an average of one month being unoccupied per year, so another 60,000 down and now your at 548,000. Now factor in cost of furniture for the condo. Assume, 2 months rent per annum over 3 years, so 120,000 baht in year one and your down to 428,000 baht. 428,000 divided by purchase price of 12,000,000 = 3.5% per annum.

3. You could look at cheaper condo's but then invariably thats a different type of tennant. e.g View Talay condo's - there your looking at more short term holiday lets with the potential hassle that go with them. What happens if someone decides to jump off your balcony, have a fight with a girl and trash the apartment or dissapear in the middle of the night without paying the rent. All quite possible and unless your litteraly watching them like a hawk, very difficult to control.

So yes you can do it and some people have done quite well out of it. From those I know that do it, they tend to buy off plan about 6 units all next to each other and get in earlier enough to get the condo under foreign ownership rules. They then rent out the condo, all the while living down the hall and then some of them sell on after saying renting it out for 2 years in the hope that the capital value has gone up. Some people at View Talay in particular have done very well out of this scenario but they are retired, have nothing else to do and look upon it more as a hobby/business interest.

The above is based on Pattaya/Jomtien values - Phuket and BKK tend to be more expensive however the yield is not that much different. So in terms of value Jomtien/Pattaya is the right place to do it compared to the others but I am not convinced the return is worth the risk. For me, I cannot sit and look over the tenant all the time.

[Oleg_Rus]

seemes pretty good business in bkk. most popular locations are suk22-33, lots of new luxury condos - most built for rental purpose. call the project owner and they will tell you everything first hand. Mainly americans and singaporeans.

good luck

[ace]

Hi,

I'm currently back in the UK making money, after a year in los, planning & plotting my way back natch.

I noticed this snippet in Digger's post: "...get the condo under foreign ownership rules."

Perhaps someone could elaborate on this? Specifically:

Can I invest in / *own* property in Thailand from a foreign Ltd company?

Does it make a difference where said company is incorporated?

And any general info / links on foreign ownership would be appreciated.

Thanks

[mbkudu]

If you bought a studio approx. 36-40 sq. meters in say soi 53 Sukhumvit you could rent it for anywhere from 13,000 to 15,000 baht per month. Expect to pay

about 1.6 million to 2.2 million baht for it. Small condos that rent for 10,000-15,000

baht per month are much easier to rent than bigger ones that rent for 20,000-50,000. It's a pretty hassle free way to earn money. If they don't pay, kick them out. It's not like the west where there is an involved process to evict a tennant.

[Digger]

If you bought a studio approx. 36-40 sq. meters in say soi 53 Sukhumvit you could rent it for anywhere from 13,000 to 15,000 baht per month. Expect to pay

about 1.6 million to 2.2 million baht for it. Small condos that rent for 10,000-15,000

baht per month are much easier to rent than bigger ones that rent for 20,000-50,000. It's a pretty hassle free way to earn money. If they don't pay, kick them out. It's not like the west where there is an involved process to evict a tennant.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thats a higher rent than I would have expected for a studio around Soi 53, and a lower price to buy it. Have you actually done it in the recent past or just giving an example.

Have you ever kicked out a tennant in a property owned in either your name or a Thai company? Again interested to know if you ever had any problems.

[Digger]

Hi,

I'm currently back in the UK making money, after a year in los, planning & plotting my way back natch.

I noticed this snippet in Digger's post: "...get the condo under foreign ownership rules."

Perhaps someone could elaborate on this? Specifically:

Can I invest in / *own* property in Thailand from a foreign Ltd company?

Does it make a difference where said company is incorporated?

And any general info / links on foreign ownership would be appreciated.

Thanks

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To qualify under foreign ownership rules for condo's it is purchased in your name, not company name as far as I am aware.

[charles]

Occupancy rates anywhere in Bangkok are increadably low. Not a good Idea even going high end is awash with competition

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Depends what part of the market you're looking at. If you're looking at studio-type places in central-ish BKK reasonably near the Skytrain/subway then occupancy rates are extremely high. For example, there are many studio apartments in the sois near Victory Monument, and apart from places that are blatantly overpriced, you will do well to find even the odd room here and there.

Of course these are cheap places, i.e. less than 10k and it doesn't necessarily mean that a condo will give satisfactory returns against the price it was bought for. However, I'd say %age-wise returns would probably be better for cheaper studios than big expensive apartments. As someone said, buy 6 in a row, live in one and you might do OK!

[mbkudu]

If you bought a studio approx. 36-40 sq. meters in say soi 53 Sukhumvit you could rent it for anywhere from 13,000 to 15,000 baht per month. Expect to pay

about 1.6 million to 2.2 million baht for it. Small condos that rent for 10,000-15,000

baht per month are much easier to rent than bigger ones that rent for 20,000-50,000. It's a pretty hassle free way to earn money. If they don't pay, kick them out. It's not like the west where there is an involved process to evict a tennant.

Thats a higher rent than I would have expected for a studio around Soi 53, and a lower price to buy it. Have you actually done it in the recent past or just giving an example.

Have you ever kicked out a tennant in a property owned in either your name or a Thai company? Again interested to know if you ever had any problems.

I am doing it. 15,000 per month, studio, Soi 53. I bought it a year and a half ago for 2.2 m. Maybe the price is higher now. I have a one year lease written with the tennant, a European expat; two months deposit and first month's rent up front. He pays all utilities. I paid for UBC install and all repairs that come up like aircon servicing ect. The only problem I have had with him is that his rent is always late between 7-15 days, but he always pays. If he doesn't pay, then he is out.

I thought of buying in an area further out for a much better bargain, but the rents

are far lower and I figured this area is good if I ever sell.

Edited February 24, 2005 by mbkudu

[thedude]

To answer Ace's question, present laws allow foreign ownership of up to 49% of strata titled space, so in any condominium building, up to 49% of the saleable floor area can be held by foreigners, this is to prevent ceding control of the property to non-Thais. Being a foreigner, you will need to finance the purchase from a foreign bank as local banks will not lend you money. The problem is foreign banks may not be able to (and may not want to) securitise the loan against your strata title. I have heard that Bangkok Bank may be able to finance your purchase if they are also operating in your home country.

[Khun Jean]

I love it. These recommendations. Leaves more for me.

I say it too "DON'T DO IT! You will loose all your money."

[OldAsiaHand]

If they don't pay, kick them out. It's not like the west where there is an involved process to evict a tennant.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Absolutely wrong.

It's effectively impossible to get people out of (or off) property here by legal means, even squatters. The standard method used by Thais to accomplish the trick is to hire thugs to beat the occupiers up and trash their property (remember Chuwit's property on Sukhumvit?), but as a foreigner, I would certainly think a very long time before going that route.

[mbkudu]

If they don't pay, kick them out. It's not like the west where there is an involved process to evict a tennant.

Absolutely wrong.

It's effectively impossible to get people out of (or off) property here by legal means, even squatters. The standard method used by Thais to accomplish the trick is to hire thugs to beat the occupiers up and trash their property (remember Chuwit's property on Sukhumvit?), but as a foreigner, I would certainly think a very long time before going that route.

In the lease I have written, if there is non payment of rent, he has 30 days to leave and the amount is deducted from the deposit. Any damages are deducted from the deposit as well. If a lease is written well and he refuses to leave according to the agreement after the 30 days, I can have the police remove him.

It's not too complicated really.

All of you nay sayers to to buying anything here can have your opinions, but so far I have felt I got an even deal that is making a decent return in a good central area. The unit has only gone up in value the past year. Maybe you'd all be better

off opening language schools or beer bars. Do as you will.

[Thaiquila]

Stupid questions, probably, but here goes.

Are there visa and work permit angles with owning condos for rental?

There has been talk about people owning in their own name, which implies not using a real Thai or dormant Thai company for the ownership.

Fine.

So people doing this are here on what kinds of visas?

Surely you can't get a business visa and work permit for owning and renting condos, correct?

Also, if you own and rent condos, what kind of work are you legally allowed to do without a work permit?

Meet with prospective tenants? Show them the unit? Do minor repairs in the unit? Collect the money? Etc.

[OldAsiaHand]

In the lease I have written, if there is non payment of rent, he has 30 days to leave and the amount is deducted from the deposit. Any damages are deducted from the deposit as well. If a lease is written well and he refuses to leave according to the agreement after the 30 days, I can have the police remove him.

It's not too complicated really.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh, I see that. And I'd really love to be there to hear you explain to the Thai police how they have to enforce what you've written in your nice simple little lease.

Look, you don't seem at all interested in the experience of those of us who've been here and dealing wsith these things for decades and that's fine. On the other hand, you might just want to give a moment or two's thought to the possibility, however remote, that your judgment with respect to how things work here isn't nearly as well founded as you apparently think it is. If you don't, good luck to you. But when you decide to sell that apartment that has 'gone up in value already,' I would be willing to bet you'll have a bit of a surprise coming.

[charles]

Oh, I see that. And I'd really love to be there to hear you explain to the Thai police how they have to enforce what you've written in your nice simple little lease.

Look, you don't seem at all interested in the experience of those of us who've been here and dealing wsith these things for decades and that's fine. On the other hand, you might just want to give a moment or two's thought to the possibility, however remote, that your judgment with respect to how things work here isn't nearly as well founded as you apparently think it is. If you don't, good luck to you. But when you decide to sell that apartment that has 'gone up in value already,' I would be willing to bet you'll have a bit of a surprise coming.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Personally, I'm quite interested to hear in your "decades of experience" even if I may say so you do have a rather immodest user name. For a balanced picture, I'm also quite interested in hearing from people who are on the face of it being quite successful at what people like you say is not possible. I think "Old Asia Hand"'s do have some wisdom that one should listen to. I'm also wary that these might be rather jaded people who've taken some hard knocks, maybe not been that successful in all respects themselves, and this colors their "advice".

Myself, I can't really see the problem with getting a piddling little single farang out of a moderately priced apartment. He's not exactly the son of Mr. Yubamrung is he? Maybe if you spoke Thai, or took an educated Thai with you, and were generally pleasant and willing to compensate them for their time, the Thai police might well be willing to help you.

Otherwise, unless said farang is holed up in his apartment 24 hours a day, I'm sure you could manage to get into your place when he's out, change the locks/padlocks or whatever and he's history. Following Asia Old Hand's logic, he's not going to have much joy with the police is he?

And in any case, a single farang in a cheapish apartment unable/unwilling to pay his rent is soon going to fall foul of someone else or the authorities or run out of money and have to leave anyway.

If the poster is getting 15k a month from a farang tenant out of an apartment he bought for about 2 million, then I say well done and good luck to him.

Edited February 25, 2005 by charles

[mbkudu]

Maybe Old Asia Hand is right. However if a good location is chosen and some thought is put into it beforehand, it's not bad. There are much riskier business ventures in Thailand.

[Digger]

Stupid questions, probably, but here goes.

Are there visa  and work permit angles with owning condos for rental?

There has been talk about people owning in their own name, which implies not using a real Thai or dormant Thai company for the ownership.

Fine.

So people doing this are here on what kinds of visas?

Surely you can't get a business visa and work permit for owning and renting condos, correct?

Also, if you own and rent condos, what kind of work are you legally allowed to do without a work permit?

Meet with prospective tenants? Show them the unit? Do minor repairs in the unit? Collect the money? Etc.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

yes there is a requirement to have a work permit. This is considered work unless you outsource the property management to a real property management company. Thats why I was curious if the poster had ever kicked out a tennant and what then happened. Simple worse case scenario - guy stops paying rent, get kicked out and then out of spite goes to immigration police and says this unscrupulous farang landlord is working and receiving an income from condo rental - does he have a work permit? If he does but for another job, I'd say not too serious an issue, providing he was declaring the condo income on his tax return. If however he has no work permit and thus no tax return - worst case scenario is that the owner gets deported for working without a work permit and the tennant has a smug satisfaction and goes on to find another farang owner that he can do the same to, as he as the tennant has broken no law.

[Digger]

If they don't pay, kick them out. It's not like the west where there is an involved process to evict a tennant.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Absolutely wrong.

It's effectively impossible to get people out of (or off) property here by legal means, even squatters. The standard method used by Thais to accomplish the trick is to hire thugs to beat the occupiers up and trash their property (remember Chuwit's property on Sukhumvit?), but as a foreigner, I would certainly think a very long time before going that route.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In the lease I have written, if there is non payment of rent, he has 30 days to leave and the amount is deducted from the deposit. Any damages are deducted from the deposit as well. If a lease is written well and he refuses to leave according to the agreement after the 30 days, I can have the police remove him.

It's not too complicated really.

All of you nay sayers to to buying anything here can have your opinions, but so far I have felt I got an even deal that is making a decent return in a good central area. The unit has only gone up in value the past year. Maybe you'd all be better

off opening language schools or beer bars. Do as you will.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But are you declaring on your tax return the 15% govt rental tax on rental value? If so your return of 15,000 month would reduce to 13,000 which is 156,000 year, less say 10,000 misc repairs so about 146,000 baht on an investment of 2,200,000 baht would equal annual return of 6.6% - not sure where you are from, but a Brit could get 5% on that kind of investment in a bank savings account.

By the way, dont misundstand me - I have over 40,000,000 baht of investment property rented out in Thailand, but its not primarily condo based and is held in legally structured companies with work permits, vat registration and outsource management agreements. If we cannot achieve a 10% nett income after taxes and expenses we walk away and look at something else - the risks just outweigh the potential downsides, of which there are a lot if your not carefull

[kreon]

If they don't pay, kick them out. It's not like the west where there is an involved process to evict a tennant.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Absolutely wrong.

It's effectively impossible to get people out of (or off) property here by legal means, even squatters. The standard method used by Thais to accomplish the trick is to hire thugs to beat the occupiers up and trash their property (remember Chuwit's property on Sukhumvit?), but as a foreigner, I would certainly think a very long time before going that route.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In the lease I have written, if there is non payment of rent, he has 30 days to leave and the amount is deducted from the deposit. Any damages are deducted from the deposit as well. If a lease is written well and he refuses to leave according to the agreement after the 30 days, I can have the police remove him.

It's not too complicated really.

All of you nay sayers to to buying anything here can have your opinions, but so far I have felt I got an even deal that is making a decent return in a good central area. The unit has only gone up in value the past year. Maybe you'd all be better

off opening language schools or beer bars. Do as you will.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But are you declaring on your tax return the 15% govt rental tax on rental value? If so your return of 15,000 month would reduce to 13,000 which is 156,000 year, less say 10,000 misc repairs so about 146,000 baht on an investment of 2,200,000 baht would equal annual return of 6.6% - not sure where you are from, but a Brit could get 5% on that kind of investment in a bank savings account.

By the way, dont misundstand me - I have over 40,000,000 baht of investment property rented out in Thailand, but its not primarily condo based and is held in legally structured companies with work permits, vat registration and outsource management agreements. If we cannot achieve a 10% nett income after taxes and expenses we walk away and look at something else - the risks just outweigh the potential downsides, of which there are a lot if your not carefull

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

even that's very modest, considering that you cannot use the leverage available in europe, us and australia.

if i cannot make 20% plus on investment properties, i would not bother, the thai's can and do make money because of the leverage factor.

in my opinion its cheaper to rent here and invest elsewhere, taking advantage of the upcoming crash market and cheaper $ in the us.

[OldAsiaHand]

Personally, I'm quite interested to hear in your "decades of experience" even if I may say so you do have a rather immodest user name... I'm also wary that these might be rather jaded people who've taken some hard knocks, maybe not been that successful in all respects themselves, and this colors their "advice".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, now....

Since I'm both disgustingly old, dag burn it, and I've been around here for nearly thirty years now, I'd say my user name was quite literal rather than 'immodest' as you suggest.

And I certainly don't intend to spend a lot of time arguing with your warning that I might be some sort of a cynical failure whose advise is colored by my own lack of success. Sometimes I think I've enjoyed more purely financial rewards here than anyone should ever be allowed anywhere and not a single day goes back that I don't marvel at my extraordinary good fortune. As a matter of fact, and here perhaps I say too much, if you live in Thailand now you would probably recognize my name, but what does that really matter?

All I mean to say is this. The simplistic rot that gets thrown out on this board from time to time by some of the nitwits who post here really annoys me. Occasionally, when I have nothing better to do, I pipe up with what I think is a more realistic and -- dare I say it? -- sophisticated point of view, one that is rooted in the nearly three decades I have spent here.

If my experience is helpful to somebody, I'm pleased. If it's not, just skim right over it. I'll never know the difference, and even if I did, I really wouldn't care very much.

Edited February 26, 2005 by OldAsiaHand

[charles]

Personally, I'm quite interested to hear in your "decades of experience" even if I may say so you do have a rather immodest user name... I'm also wary that these might be rather jaded people who've taken some hard knocks, maybe not been that successful in all respects themselves, and this colors their "advice".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, now....

Since I'm both disgustingly old, dag burn it, and I've been around here for nearly thirty years now, I'd say my user name was quite literal rather than 'immodest' as you suggest.

And I certainly don't intend to spend a lot of time arguing with your warning that I might be some sort of a cynical failure whose advise is colored by my own lack of success. Sometimes I think I've enjoyed more purely financial rewards here than anyone should ever be allowed anywhere and not a single day goes back that I don't marvel at my extraordinary good fortune. As a matter of fact, and here perhaps I say too much, if you live in Thailand now you would probably recognize my name, but what does that really matter?

All I mean to say is this. The simplistic rot that gets thrown out on this board from time to time by some of the nitwits who post here really annoys me. Occasionally, when I have nothing better to do, I pipe up with what I think is a more realistic and -- dare I say it? -- sophisticated point of view, one that is rooted in the nearly three decades I have spent here.

If my experience is helpful to somebody, I'm pleased. If it's not, just skim right over it. I'll never know the difference, and even if I did, I really wouldn't care very much.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for the reply. I certainly don't wish to denigrate your success or knowledge, which I for one am always interested to read (please note use of the word "might"). Doesn't mean that one should take the advice of "old hands" as gospel though. There are old hands who are multi-milllionaires and there are old hands propping up a Washington Square bar who can barely speak a word of Thai having been here 30 years.

I'd certainly take the advice of someone who'd been successful over 30 years here over some "simplistic" newbie (in your opinion). Nevertheless, I'd still want to question whether the "more sophisticated point of view" of the old hand wasn't simplistic as well.

One example is the assertion that "Thais do not like buying second hand houses". This may be true now and true over the previous 30 years. Will it hold true in another 15-20 years? I don't know, maybe it will, especially if there's no economic and social development, population growth etc. Maybe, on the other hand, there's plenty of reason to think that things might not always remain the same. What has been the experience of other societies in East Asia that have become largely developed countries?

Edited February 26, 2005 by charles

[slimdog]

Just my understanding.. (and I am happy to be corrected if wrong)

Leases are contracts under civil law not criminal. Therefore unless a court order has been issued, the police will not want to be involved. Even the courts will not want to be involved until the leasee is actually in deficit, meaning the 2 months deposit and 1 month advance has been exhausted.

Generally if a landlord wished to remove a tennant from their property because they have failed to make payment(s),then the only action open to them (other then strong arm tactics) is termination of the electric supply, which only the property owner can get re-connected.

[taxexile]

is termination of the electric supply

which is the quickest and easiest way to remove a squatting freeloading tenant.

[Bizz]

is termination of the electric supply

which is the quickest and easiest way to remove a squatting freeloading tenant.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Then the utilities have to be in your name is this the case in Thailand that utilities are still in the landlords name.??????????

[taxexile]

Then the utilities have to be in your name is this the case in Thailand that utilities are still in the landlords name.??????????

if the landlord wishes to retain some "control" over a tenant then it would be wise to keep the utilities in the landlords name and present the tenant with a monthly bill for the elec. and water.

if a rental non - payment scenario then occurs , off goes the power and water.

a landlord should always have the tenants balls in the vice , it should never , ever be the other way round.

Edited February 26, 2005 by taxexile

[ProThaiExpat]

Having just read this thread, I am struck with the basis for Charles's investment advice. He bougt a condo and has rented it for two years. Hardly the experience I would rely on as a measure of the validity of an investment.

Similar to relying on the stock market advice of one who has bought a stock and seen the price go up. Hasn't sold it, nor have any other investment experience.

My condo tenant experience showed me that those shiny knob covering lock out devices are all to prevalent in most condo buildings. Certainly, keeping the utilities in the owners name is a must in the event of eviction.

I wonder if Charles has ever seen an apartment or a house in which the tenants have been evicted. Even the toilet seats are gone, let alone lightbulbs and anything not nailed down. Vandalism is of course rampant.

I am an Old Asia Hand by all definitions and I wouldn't buy a property to rent for investment in a country with weak condo laws as are the case in Thailand.

Something should be said about those who are emotionally well suited to be landlords and those of us who are not. One must understand a renter's mentality to deal with them, as a class, successfully.

Caveat: To paraphrase, "Neither a landlord or tenant be" would be my motto to live by.

[charles]

Having just read this thread, I am struck with the basis for Charles's investment advice.  He bougt a condo and has rented it for two years.  Hardly the experience I would rely on as a measure of the validity of an investment.

I've bought a condo and have rented it out for two years? I think you must be mistaking me for someone else! I do not own a condo (I rent an apartment) and I don't think I've given any "investment advice". Personally, I would only buy a condo or other property to LIVE in and hopefully later to pass on to my children.

However, it doesn't do any harm every now and then to play devil's advocate and question the received wisdom of the "old Asia hands" even if, more often than not, they are largely right. Especially if those "old hands" (not referring to you) have something of a know-all, arrogant, condescending tone. I think one of these almost said "Do you know who I am?"

Actually, I have a feeling I know who he is but his name just keeps escaping me...