Condos- are they a bad investment?

[Anonymous]

We are looking to spend about $800k in a resort area that has a wide range of home prices up to 10mil+, very low inventory, limited areas to build.

We can afford a condo at this point. This is a property we hope to hold for 20+ years and retire. Would you wait it out a year or two (we will get a large amount of cash from company going public) to buy a SFH where we own the land or would you get in for the condo (Small cabins or homes are about 1.25). I'm a little hesitant to buy a condo because the ceiling seems to be much lower for long term growth plus HOAs, etc. Owning the land offers more flexibility if we someday want to sell to someone who wants to build a much larger house, etc or we want to build a nicer home ourselves in 20 years. Most of the condos are on the older side too.

[Anonymous]

condos are a good investment sometimes. it sounds like you are in area where one may make sense.

[Anonymous]

Condos can be a good investment if you do your homework. They might be considered a bad investment if you buy without researching in depth and it turns out to be a poorly run and managed development. They also might be considered a worse investment than a SFH. Bad investment vs good investment is individual and relative.

[Anonymous]

My experience with owning and trying to sell a condo has been negative. I'm sure there are some for which it has been positive. I'll share my thoughts.

Negatives:
1) Poorly run HOA's with power hungry board members (volunteers) who make it their mission to make your life miserable. I should add that I was an HOA board member for two years so I saw what went on once Oz's screen was pulled back.

2) Because of the poorly run HOA's you often have a lot of deferred maintenance issues, which get worse as the building ages. Many times the deferred maintenance is due to low-reserves because of mismanagement of funds (not fraud, just lazy management), and inability to manage vendors. This in turn leads to increases in your monthly dues AND special assessments which can be in the thousands.

3) When you go to sell your place, unless it's a cash buyer you are beholden to the comps in your building and other similar buildings in the area.

4) Most condo communities have a ton of restrictions when it comes to short-term rentals, in case you want to use it as an income producing property.

Positives:
1) lock the door and forget it. Low maintenance
2) low entry point when purchasing

[Anonymous]

If you're planning to retire there, does whether it will be an investment or not really matter? Would you prefer to retire to a condo or SFH? A condo is less maintenance and in the meantime could rent it out potentially easier than a SFH.

[Anonymous]

Depends on location. In cities, maybe. In suburbs, no. Especially with condo fees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you're planning to retire there, does whether it will be an investment or not really matter? Would you prefer to retire to a condo or SFH? A condo is less maintenance and in the meantime could rent it out potentially easier than a SFH.

A small sfh on one level. The condos are old and I don’t even see them surviving 20 more years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Depends on location. In cities, maybe. In suburbs, no. Especially with condo fees.

It’s neither really. It’s a rural ski town with a small historic downtown with small dense lots and homes about 1k-3k square feet. The big new ones are expensive- like $7 million. Then there’s a ski base area that has most 1970’s-80’s buildings in low-average condition, all walk up and about 100 homes in the mountains that are 1.5-10 million.
Then about 3-5 miles out there are mixed communities with homes ranging from 1.25-10million. I’m wondering which area we should choose. Right now our budget is the condo or townhouse in the older building but if we wait a few years it opens up doors to get a small home on the lower price range a few miles out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Depends on location. In cities, maybe. In suburbs, no. Especially with condo fees.

It’s neither really. It’s a rural ski town with a small historic downtown with small dense lots and homes about 1k-3k square feet. The big new ones are expensive- like $7 million. Then there’s a ski base area that has most 1970’s-80’s buildings in low-average condition, all walk up and about 100 homes in the mountains that are 1.5-10 million.
Then about 3-5 miles out there are mixed communities with homes ranging from 1.25-10million. I’m wondering which area we should choose. Right now our budget is the condo or townhouse in the older building but if we wait a few years it opens up doors to get a small home on the lower price range a few miles out.

A ski town is different from the dmv area. 9 times out of 10, the townhouse will be a better investment than a condo. Just like a SFH will be a better investment than a th.

[Anonymous]

i think you are fine going with a condo. a lot of the buyers in a ski area will be second (or third) vacation home types. those people will go for a nice condo.

[Anonymous]

Investing in condos is a good choice, and the idea is spreading fast. I have been researching it for a while and found out that investing in pre-construction condos is the better plan.
https://www.yourcondos.com/browse-condos/location/markham/
It has many advantages and some risks too. The value of pre-construction condos is not calculated as that of a completely finished one. So if you make the correct decision, the result can save you good money, if not a significant loss.
If you are ready to take some risks and research, you can go for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Depends on location. In cities, maybe. In suburbs, no. Especially with condo fees.

It’s neither really. It’s a rural ski town with a small historic downtown with small dense lots and homes about 1k-3k square feet. The big new ones are expensive- like $7 million. Then there’s a ski base area that has most 1970’s-80’s buildings in low-average condition, all walk up and about 100 homes in the mountains that are 1.5-10 million.
Then about 3-5 miles out there are mixed communities with homes ranging from 1.25-10million. I’m wondering which area we should choose. Right now our budget is the condo or townhouse in the older building but if we wait a few years it opens up doors to get a small home on the lower price range a few miles out.

If you can do short term rentals in your condo, you should be fine. Usually in this type of environment there are also property management companies that would be glad to service your short term rental for a fee and make it hands off for you. but if the rules are restrictive and the building is really targeted for the permanent residents or long term renters then I would avoid it. Rules vary by condo, so make sure to ask all these questions before expanding any effort.

[Anonymous]

Condos can plummet in value due to deferred maintenance issues and special assessments. You won't have that concern with a SFH.

[Anonymous]

It sounds as though you should dig deep into your actual target market, OP. You're asking very general questions to a broad segment here. Do some homework.

[Anonymous]

Yes