Originally posted by orion
View Post
If you read the book properly, you should have seen that it was an experiment of using no money/equity and not something to build wealth up more at all. If it all worked out well, I could teach my son to do something similar when he is 19 (so 10 years from when I started).
Of course your son won't be able to do anything if he doesn't have at least some $ to start with (or a guarantee from you). With 40% deposit required that would be lots of $ even in Hawkes Bay.
You would have hopefully read that I don’t need any more money, I have lots of cashflow (over $20k a month passive plus over $20k of debt being paid off every month) already and don’t need to work at all. My focus is on enjoying life, family, and also property trading which I enjoy a lot. It is fun. If I really wanted to, I could travel the world now for 12 months, but I would get really bored.
We have a few trips away each year, and are going on our next one next week with our family, kids, and other investor friends (17 of us altogether).
So I have no idea what you mean by ‘playing a game now’ or eating assets, or ‘a goal to make a lot of money’?
Your post makes no sense at all.
We have a few trips away each year, and are going on our next one next week with our family, kids, and other investor friends (17 of us altogether).
So I have no idea what you mean by ‘playing a game now’ or eating assets, or ‘a goal to make a lot of money’?
Your post makes no sense at all.
What I mean by 'playing a game now' is that you don't need MORE but strive for more because you enjoy it. It is a game in that context.
And there is nothing wrong with that - everyone needs a hobby and if more money (or assets) is a byproduct then no harm.
I don't get bored with travel - my hobby maybe (I like building houses too so will still end up doing something property wise).
If you looked at the current value of your assets - net value today - and the net income (excluding finance costs) what do you think that would be?
I know you aren't a fan of current value (you have stated so here and on FB) but that is what you have have and what you should expect a return on.
If you can get a better return for less risk why wouldn't you?
Leveraged property has more risk than non-leveraged property. All property has more risk than many give credence to. The biggest risk is probably the tenants.
Comment