Second home ownership

[Anonymous]

Maybe I’m too poor for a second house - but I make high 6 figures and it seems like a giant unnecessary money pit. I’d need to be making at least 1M a year plus 2 kids at least in high school, with all years of HS and college already banked, before I’d think spending money on a second house made even remote sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I’m too poor for a second house - but I make high 6 figures and it seems like a giant unnecessary money pit. I’d need to be making at least 1M a year plus 2 kids at least in high school, with all years of HS and college already banked, before I’d think spending money on a second house made even remote sense.

Uh huh. I'd argue that paying for private high school for most people is even more of a "giant unnecessary money pit." That's half your second home right there!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I’m too poor for a second house - but I make high 6 figures and it seems like a giant unnecessary money pit. I’d need to be making at least 1M a year plus 2 kids at least in high school, with all years of HS and college already banked, before I’d think spending money on a second house made even remote sense.

Uh huh. I'd argue that paying for private high school for most people is even more of a "giant unnecessary money pit." That's half your second home right there!

I think private school is where you learn that education takes priority over materialism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some of these posters sound like they can't afford a second home and they're grasping at straws to justify why no one should have one.

+1. And a lot of greedy amateur landlords post here and seek to hoard more property for themselves to rent out via STRs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I’m too poor for a second house - but I make high 6 figures and it seems like a giant unnecessary money pit. I’d need to be making at least 1M a year plus 2 kids at least in high school, with all years of HS and college already banked, before I’d think spending money on a second house made even remote sense.

Uh huh. I'd argue that paying for private high school for most people is even more of a "giant unnecessary money pit." That's half your second home right there!

I think private school is where you learn that education takes priority over materialism.

Real estate is not materialism, it’s part of a diversified investment portfolio and you get to enjoy it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have alarm systems for fire, carbon monoxide, security, and water detection. We have a property manager who checks things periodically and is available for emergencies, deliveries, etc if we aren’t there. In the summer, we have weekly landscaping and pool services. We have ring cameras and remote controlled heating and cooling systems.

None of this is cost effective. Is someone arguing that vacation homes are a bargain? They’re not.

Its very cost effective.

Look, my family and I spend about 5 weeks total on Hatteras Island in our little 3 bed 2 bath salt box every year. There is no yard to maintain. The shingles and roof are cedar (no maintenance) and we have hurricane shutters on the home when not there. Break ins just aren't a thing down there. We cut water and HVAC when we leave and remotely turn on HVAC about 5 hours before we arrive. Utilities average out to 110 a month. If we rented it comps are about $2600 a week. So if we rented we'd be spending $13,000 alone just on rent. Our total costs last year were $4300. So we are 9 grand better off and the house appreciated about 40% in the time we have owned it.

Then there is the huge bonus of getting to pick travel days based on traffic, having an entire wardrobe and toiletries down there (little to no packing) and a freezer full of pizzas and lasagnas for the first night down.

Icing on the cake is having the same picture every year of my three kids sitting in order on the porch from when they were babies until they were grown.

So, not to get into the weeds on your analysis, but I gather you paid 100% cash for the house? I don't see how your $4300 in total would include a mortgage, so I guess it's just property taxes, utilities and insurance? $4300 still seems low for all that.

The issue is always opportunity cost. I don't know much you paid, but if you had put your let's say $500k in just an S&P index like 10 years ago then you would have earned $15,000 in annual dividends (higher actually now since 2015) plus the S&P has tripled since 2015.

From a purely financial perspective you would be way, way better off if you had just decided to rent for 5 weeks each year.

lol. I love when broke “experts” post here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have alarm systems for fire, carbon monoxide, security, and water detection. We have a property manager who checks things periodically and is available for emergencies, deliveries, etc if we aren’t there. In the summer, we have weekly landscaping and pool services. We have ring cameras and remote controlled heating and cooling systems.

None of this is cost effective. Is someone arguing that vacation homes are a bargain? They’re not.

Its very cost effective.

Look, my family and I spend about 5 weeks total on Hatteras Island in our little 3 bed 2 bath salt box every year. There is no yard to maintain. The shingles and roof are cedar (no maintenance) and we have hurricane shutters on the home when not there. Break ins just aren't a thing down there. We cut water and HVAC when we leave and remotely turn on HVAC about 5 hours before we arrive. Utilities average out to 110 a month. If we rented it comps are about $2600 a week. So if we rented we'd be spending $13,000 alone just on rent. Our total costs last year were $4300. So we are 9 grand better off and the house appreciated about 40% in the time we have owned it.

Then there is the huge bonus of getting to pick travel days based on traffic, having an entire wardrobe and toiletries down there (little to no packing) and a freezer full of pizzas and lasagnas for the first night down.

Icing on the cake is having the same picture every year of my three kids sitting in order on the porch from when they were babies until they were grown.

So, not to get into the weeds on your analysis, but I gather you paid 100% cash for the house? I don't see how your $4300 in total would include a mortgage, so I guess it's just property taxes, utilities and insurance? $4300 still seems low for all that.

The issue is always opportunity cost. I don't know much you paid, but if you had put your let's say $500k in just an S&P index like 10 years ago then you would have earned $15,000 in annual dividends (higher actually now since 2015) plus the S&P has tripled since 2015.

From a purely financial perspective you would be way, way better off if you had just decided to rent for 5 weeks each year.

lol. I love when broke “experts” post here.

How is the analysis the work of a broke person? How is the analysis even wrong?

[Anonymous]

I think what you’re missing is that it’s not an ‘or’ proposition for some people with second homes? We are based in Tribeca, have a second home in the Hamptons, and we use it a ton. Move out there for the whole summer, use it at least once a month during the year, spend a week there in the winter while kids are on break. It’s wonderful for us to not have to pack anything, to have a spot to host friends and family, and that ease can’t be duplicated by a rental.

We have also taken 6 international trips this year (some for long weekends, some for a week) and a few domestic. It’s just not always a situation where you do trips or go to some musty cottage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I’m too poor for a second house - but I make high 6 figures and it seems like a giant unnecessary money pit. I’d need to be making at least 1M a year plus 2 kids at least in high school, with all years of HS and college already banked, before I’d think spending money on a second house made even remote sense.

Uh huh. I'd argue that paying for private high school for most people is even more of a "giant unnecessary money pit." That's half your second home right there!

I think private school is where you learn that education takes priority over materialism.

Uh huh. And you're sending your kids to private school without any eye towards them getting into a better college as a result and from there getting a better job and making more money and buying more "things" like second homes. For you and the similarly situated, it's only about the "education." You want your kid to be a highly educated janitor.

Hypocrite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I’m too poor for a second house - but I make high 6 figures and it seems like a giant unnecessary money pit. I’d need to be making at least 1M a year plus 2 kids at least in high school, with all years of HS and college already banked, before I’d think spending money on a second house made even remote sense.

Uh huh. I'd argue that paying for private high school for most people is even more of a "giant unnecessary money pit." That's half your second home right there!

I think private school is where you learn that education takes priority over materialism.

Yes, private schools are a real refuge from materialism…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have alarm systems for fire, carbon monoxide, security, and water detection. We have a property manager who checks things periodically and is available for emergencies, deliveries, etc if we aren’t there. In the summer, we have weekly landscaping and pool services. We have ring cameras and remote controlled heating and cooling systems.

None of this is cost effective. Is someone arguing that vacation homes are a bargain? They’re not.

Its very cost effective.

Look, my family and I spend about 5 weeks total on Hatteras Island in our little 3 bed 2 bath salt box every year. There is no yard to maintain. The shingles and roof are cedar (no maintenance) and we have hurricane shutters on the home when not there. Break ins just aren't a thing down there. We cut water and HVAC when we leave and remotely turn on HVAC about 5 hours before we arrive. Utilities average out to 110 a month. If we rented it comps are about $2600 a week. So if we rented we'd be spending $13,000 alone just on rent. Our total costs last year were $4300. So we are 9 grand better off and the house appreciated about 40% in the time we have owned it.

Then there is the huge bonus of getting to pick travel days based on traffic, having an entire wardrobe and toiletries down there (little to no packing) and a freezer full of pizzas and lasagnas for the first night down.

Icing on the cake is having the same picture every year of my three kids sitting in order on the porch from when they were babies until they were grown.

So, not to get into the weeds on your analysis, but I gather you paid 100% cash for the house? I don't see how your $4300 in total would include a mortgage, so I guess it's just property taxes, utilities and insurance? $4300 still seems low for all that.

The issue is always opportunity cost. I don't know much you paid, but if you had put your let's say $500k in just an S&P index like 10 years ago then you would have earned $15,000 in annual dividends (higher actually now since 2015) plus the S&P has tripled since 2015.

From a purely financial perspective you would be way, way better off if you had just decided to rent for 5 weeks each year.

lol. I love when broke “experts” post here.

How is the analysis the work of a broke person? How is the analysis even wrong?

The rich don’t piss their free time away writing screeds on a sub forum read by ten people. It’s Reddit tier financial advice babble from a transparent prole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I’m too poor for a second house - but I make high 6 figures and it seems like a giant unnecessary money pit. I’d need to be making at least 1M a year plus 2 kids at least in high school, with all years of HS and college already banked, before I’d think spending money on a second house made even remote sense.

Uh huh. I'd argue that paying for private high school for most people is even more of a "giant unnecessary money pit." That's half your second home right there!

I think private school is where you learn that education takes priority over materialism.

Real estate is not materialism, it’s part of a diversified investment portfolio and you get to enjoy it!

If it’s an investment, it’s like a mutual fund that charges 3-5% fees a year. Taxes, interest, insurance, upkeep, maintenance will easily run 20-30,000 a year. Plus all of the equipment is also depreciating. So, every day that goes by is twice as much air conditioner you’ll eventually have to buy.

I’m all in on primary residence being important and rentals being right under the right circumstances but calling a second home an investment is crazy. And if you’re renting it out, it’s not a second home.

It is purely a luxury. One that many people who can afford it may not want to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have alarm systems for fire, carbon monoxide, security, and water detection. We have a property manager who checks things periodically and is available for emergencies, deliveries, etc if we aren’t there. In the summer, we have weekly landscaping and pool services. We have ring cameras and remote controlled heating and cooling systems.

None of this is cost effective. Is someone arguing that vacation homes are a bargain? They’re not.

Its very cost effective.

Look, my family and I spend about 5 weeks total on Hatteras Island in our little 3 bed 2 bath salt box every year. There is no yard to maintain. The shingles and roof are cedar (no maintenance) and we have hurricane shutters on the home when not there. Break ins just aren't a thing down there. We cut water and HVAC when we leave and remotely turn on HVAC about 5 hours before we arrive. Utilities average out to 110 a month. If we rented it comps are about $2600 a week. So if we rented we'd be spending $13,000 alone just on rent. Our total costs last year were $4300. So we are 9 grand better off and the house appreciated about 40% in the time we have owned it.

Then there is the huge bonus of getting to pick travel days based on traffic, having an entire wardrobe and toiletries down there (little to no packing) and a freezer full of pizzas and lasagnas for the first night down.

Icing on the cake is having the same picture every year of my three kids sitting in order on the porch from when they were babies until they were grown.

So, not to get into the weeds on your analysis, but I gather you paid 100% cash for the house? I don't see how your $4300 in total would include a mortgage, so I guess it's just property taxes, utilities and insurance? $4300 still seems low for all that.

The issue is always opportunity cost. I don't know much you paid, but if you had put your let's say $500k in just an S&P index like 10 years ago then you would have earned $15,000 in annual dividends (higher actually now since 2015) plus the S&P has tripled since 2015.

From a purely financial perspective you would be way, way better off if you had just decided to rent for 5 weeks each year.

lol. I love when broke “experts” post here.

How is the analysis the work of a broke person? How is the analysis even wrong?

The rich don’t piss their free time away writing screeds on a sub forum read by ten people. It’s Reddit tier financial advice babble from a transparent prole.

Don’t worry honey. We’re not judging you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have alarm systems for fire, carbon monoxide, security, and water detection. We have a property manager who checks things periodically and is available for emergencies, deliveries, etc if we aren’t there. In the summer, we have weekly landscaping and pool services. We have ring cameras and remote controlled heating and cooling systems.

None of this is cost effective. Is someone arguing that vacation homes are a bargain? They’re not.

Its very cost effective.

Look, my family and I spend about 5 weeks total on Hatteras Island in our little 3 bed 2 bath salt box every year. There is no yard to maintain. The shingles and roof are cedar (no maintenance) and we have hurricane shutters on the home when not there. Break ins just aren't a thing down there. We cut water and HVAC when we leave and remotely turn on HVAC about 5 hours before we arrive. Utilities average out to 110 a month. If we rented it comps are about $2600 a week. So if we rented we'd be spending $13,000 alone just on rent. Our total costs last year were $4300. So we are 9 grand better off and the house appreciated about 40% in the time we have owned it.

Then there is the huge bonus of getting to pick travel days based on traffic, having an entire wardrobe and toiletries down there (little to no packing) and a freezer full of pizzas and lasagnas for the first night down.

Icing on the cake is having the same picture every year of my three kids sitting in order on the porch from when they were babies until they were grown.

So, not to get into the weeds on your analysis, but I gather you paid 100% cash for the house? I don't see how your $4300 in total would include a mortgage, so I guess it's just property taxes, utilities and insurance? $4300 still seems low for all that.

The issue is always opportunity cost. I don't know much you paid, but if you had put your let's say $500k in just an S&P index like 10 years ago then you would have earned $15,000 in annual dividends (higher actually now since 2015) plus the S&P has tripled since 2015.

From a purely financial perspective you would be way, way better off if you had just decided to rent for 5 weeks each year.

lol. I love when broke “experts” post here.

How is the analysis the work of a broke person? How is the analysis even wrong?

The rich don’t piss their free time away writing screeds on a sub forum read by ten people. It’s Reddit tier financial advice babble from a transparent prole.

It’s actually 100% accurate and not remotely approaching a screed.

I guess you aren’t rich if you are here pissing away your free time…so how would you know?

The rich also don’t own a little house in Hatteras that they only visit 5 weeks per year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I’m too poor for a second house - but I make high 6 figures and it seems like a giant unnecessary money pit. I’d need to be making at least 1M a year plus 2 kids at least in high school, with all years of HS and college already banked, before I’d think spending money on a second house made even remote sense.

Uh huh. I'd argue that paying for private high school for most people is even more of a "giant unnecessary money pit." That's half your second home right there!

I think private school is where you learn that education takes priority over materialism.

Uh huh. And you're sending your kids to private school without any eye towards them getting into a better college as a result and from there getting a better job and making more money and buying more "things" like second homes. For you and the similarly situated, it's only about the "education." You want your kid to be a highly educated janitor.

Hypocrite.

Nothing wrong with prioritizing education so your kids can afford a higher standard of living. Lordy.