If you want to find out, you have to pull a bunch of comps. You can’t just use one condo as a crystal ball.
Personally, I think new condos go through the same cycle as new SFH developments, but faster. Unless the location is red hot, imo 10-25 years old is a tough age for a condo development. It starts to look a little tired, trends have changed, and if the condo association has been mismanaged you start to find out when big ticket maintenance things start coming due. |
Here’s a new construction condo in the same area, similar size, with much lower HOA fees. https://redf.in/eNbjw4
|
A lot of the pre construction condo sales around that time sold too high. There was a big condo construction boom around then. Declines like that mostly happened during the condo sell out. |
SFHs are bad investments also. Property taxes, maintenance, renovations so that the house doesn't become dated, buying too much stuff to fill the space, commuting costs -- all of it adds up, and if owners are really honest with themselves, they'll realize that owning is not a winning proposition in most cases except if your timing is perfect and you buy before a real estate upswing (such as 2019-2021). Better to put your money in S&P index funds, but alas all of us need a place to live so the best move is to buy no more space than you need and try to minimize maintenance and taxes. |
+1. I think it is more of a case of overpaying in the first instance. Would need to pull more comps but this price doesn’t seem wildly low or high for Logan Circle/Shaw. The parking spot alone in that area is worth roughly $50k. |
Can you live in your stock portfolio? Do index funds provide a shelter or roof over your head? No. I never said they are a better investment than the S&P 500, but they are a better investment than condos and you they typically hold their value after adjusting for inflation. You need to live somewhere and purchasing a single family home will typically result in more wealth accumulation than buying a condo or permanently renting. |
Watch out though because low HOA fees can just mean they’re not preparing adequately for the future when they will need to replace elevators, roofs, windows etc etc. Then they will dramatically hike the fees and/or do a big assessment. |
That is exactly my point. The HOAs on this new construction are likely artificially low because the developer is trying to make it more desirable and artificially inflate the buyer pool that can qualify for a loan. I suspect that the original condo listed on this thread had similar HOA fees when it was first built. The annual HOA fee increasing from 300 to 1000 would be capitalized into the property value and reduce the value of the property by around 5%. |
HOA fees will continue to increase year after year. It’s not like insurance premiums are going down, or maintainence costs. |
+1 If you have a family, then you want to live somewhere that can comfortably fit everyone and either has good schools or pay for private. Most people aren't hoarding millions in investments while forcing their family to live like poor people. |
HOA fees (for condos) increase faster than the overall inflation rate. There is a collective action problem with HOAs because the preventative maintenance is split between multiple owners. The other problem is that the ownership structure for condos creates a situation where it is incredible difficult to sell the entire building for demolition and redevelopment. Condos building tend to stick around much longer than their economically useful life with high HOA fees because it’s difficult to get a supermajority of members to agree to sell. |
I imagine most condo HOA boards are severely mismanaged too. Who wants to actually take on more work? |