The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Politics & Current Events / Retire Early CampFIRE


Subject:  Re: OT: KISS Date:  8/11/2002  2:34 PM
Author:  JWR1945 Number:  73518 of 883298

CatherineCoy responded to my comment that:

If you had sold for a loss, you would still be liable for the deficiency.

with this:

But I bought at a significant discount which greatly limits my downside.

She is right that she limited her risk substantially by buying at a good price. She was wrong, however, to identify a low down payment as limiting her risk.

But she does have a good post. It is worth reading and I have recommended it.

BTW, CatherineCoy, the reason that intercst is so hostile to real estate investments is that it has cost him several hundreds of thousands of dollars (mainly in opportunity costs). He has also lived through the real estate disaster in the oil patch area. He has seen first hand how horrible it can be when things go wrong. telegraph also comes from the same area and has lived through that real estate bust. But I don't think that he has suffered as much financially as intercst. That is why I think that telegraph's comments and observations are so valuable to a real estate investor. You yourself have commented at how penetrating his questions can be.

Have fun.

John R.
Copyright 1996-2020 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us