MovieChat Forums > Income Property (2008) Discussion > Option 1 or Option 2

Option 1 or Option 2

posted 11 years ago by There-Can-Be-Only-One
2 replies | jump to latest

Okay. I get it when someone chooses Option 1 if:

1) They really want/need to keep a certain portion of their space for themselves, or if they intend eventually to turn it back into their own space
2) The price difference between the two options is vast, or if the income difference between the two options is very small
or
3) Having more bedrooms in Option 2 would, in their area, likely attract a bunch of college kids, and that's not the tenant they want.

Those valid reasons make perfect sense to me.

But if they aren't losing any more of their space in Option 2, would make much better rent in Option 2, would attract the same kind of, or even better, tenant than they would in Option 1, and the price difference is small (like $50,000 vs $40,000)...

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY CHOOSE OPTION 1! I can't figure out their reasoning. Yes, $50,000 is a lot of money, but so is $40,000. They don't come down to much difference when you're repaying the loan.

Anyway, it just always bugs me unless I get their reason. Man up, people!

Nnh, see this is why - this is why you never - NEVER! trust a stranger that you meet in the middle of the woods, in the middle of the night, just pushing around a dead body in a wheelbarrow.

[–] SataiDelen 10 years ago

I understand what your are saying, and I fully agree with you. However, many people do not think that way (i.e. "Well, option 1 is $35,000, and Option 2 is $45,000...). They only see the immediate amount it is going to cost them, and don't see the long-term value for going for option 2 over option 1.

I too, have often watched this show, and disagreed with the home owner going for option 1 over option 2, when clearly option 2 is the better way to go.

[–] DCompton86 10 years ago

I agree. The reasons you list for keeping Option 1 really are the only valid ones....well at least rationally. I'd rather pay more and know the place will be good longer.

I do agree that sometimes Scott goes into his head crazily with Option 2 and will basically leave a teeny tiny kitchen, tiny living room, and then do four or five (again very small) bedrooms. That just leads to renting out the place per room and then dealing with the crazy turnover rate in renters (likely people who only live there for maybe six months) - plus the younger the tenant, the less likely they will care for the place and will end up destroying things. In this case, it would be better to go with the two bedroom (or so) option that leaves plenty of space and likely will attract a couple/small family who may live there for years.

"It's better to be hated for who you are than be loved for who you aren't."