Quit the world at 34 and now "broken" and refuse to go back

The choir (or lumpen slums of cyberspace as we've notably been called) is still interested,
"lumpen slums of cyberspace"? I LOL'ed on that one.

Let me guess, must have been one of our occasional forex guys (who pop up here from time to time) throw that one out.
 
"lumpen slums of cyberspace"? I LOL'ed on that one.

Let me guess, must have been one of our occasional forex guys (who pop up here from time to time) throw that one out.

It was before you came here. I forgot how it started or what the subject was, but the poster called us that before walking off the forum. :D He was a lawyer, if my memory serves.
 
... they are more interesting than most of our retirement stories of "We worked hard at a regular job until our family was raised and we had enough money"...

I had a well-paid regular job, but I walked off it and worked 2x and 3x as hard for no pay for a while. After the startup failed, I did part-time contract work to survive. I was also "broken", and could not see myself working as Dilbert anymore.

It's amazing that I survived and managed to ER at 55. Darn, I still had some luck with me. Could have been a lot worse. :) Wouldn't advise anyone to repeat the same.
 
Such fond memories. The eloquence and creatively articulate nature of visitors and prospective members is one of the things that makes this forum such an enjoyable place. :)
 
PJ I was with you until you mentioned "extreme Lifestyle choice" What part of his lifestyle do you think is extreme? The early part where he rented out all the RE and lived in a converted van, or the part 6 years later when he lives in a 500K boat or floating house. Apparently even the choice to van live wasn't an economic necessity or permanent lifestyle choice, but simply a temporary means to an end.

Two completely different ends of the spectrum. Not having children or even a fixed home base is not really rare around here and not consider extreme IMO. If you were guessing while lifestyle do you think he will enjoy going forward.



I see living in a van as extreme. What % of the population live in vans full time? Is it 30%, 10%, 0.1%, less? When do you consider the change from mainstream to extreme?

I also see taking a lot of leverage and knowingly taking big financial risks so they can retire early as extreme. Many people who plan want higher probability of success. In the forum, what % of people retire on ~50% POS? 30%, 10%, etc?

I would agree with a couple other poster that the OPs style is very course/aggressive. I wonder if that influenced their enjoyment working? If you’re trying to influence people, I wouldn’t suggest aggressively and combatively telling people something.

As for the plan - typical house price appreciation is “3-5%” yet OP expects it to match stock returns? Also OP is paying ‘8% expense ratio/management fee’ and based on previous ‘wing it financially’ it isn’t clear if they are accruing major repair costs (on the house or boat?)

As stated - OP want to share the message that you can take major risks and so long as you get lucky (like buying real estate in a during a downturn in an area that ends up highly appreciating) it will turn out alright.
I suppose I could also post that all you need to do was buy monster energy drink stock/bit coin and it worked out for me - you can do it too?
 
Just curious how you covering your health insurance aspect and potential exposure to the high deductibles and out of pocket maximums that come with catastrophic only health insurance.

Again... we're woefully undereducated in this area, but this is a good reminder that we're coming to an age where we should work under something other than the "ocean heals all" philosophy thats gotten us this far. :blush:

You guys are right around the age at which I was diagnosed. It's definitely imperative for you to investigate your coverage better. Glad you are getting something helpful out of this thread!

I don't think a catastrophic health plan is that risky for a younger, healthy person. The important thing is that you're covered on the high side, in case a major illness or accident happens. My ACA bronze plan is expensive enough (if I didn't have the subsidy) and has a high enough deductible/OOP Max that it feels like a catastrophic plan.
 
Prior to ACA, my pre-ACA plan was $10K deductible/year. It looked scary, but then I realized that if I chose a plan with a lower deductible the premium would be so much higher, and being healthy then (at 50), we would not exceed even that lower deductible.
 
On the contrary... that's exactly what I had been told and had understood to be true about this forum, which is why I joined and have been attempting to actively contribute to the community, both in this thread and beyond.


And in this thread i've been attempting to do exactly what you just said makes the community so helpful:




The only thing I haven't yet figured out (though several theories have been tossed around) is why, while many of those on the forum seem to appreciate yet another story/perspective/path... a small handful seem to be completely overrun with angst and offense that such words would possibly be spoken.

Your posts and story sound very 'fly by the seat of your pants' without much of a solid plan. I'm not saying that's actually the case, just how it comes across. And even if that is the case, that's your prerogative. However, I suspect that makes many here, who meticulously plan, quite uncomfortable.

This being said, could you give us an idea of what your assets and liabilities are. How you're doing this? How many properties you have, the type of income they're pulling in. That sort of thing. So far what you're posting seems pretty vague, so when you say that others can do what you've done, it personally makes me quite anxious thinking of doing it. With a better picture of your situation, that might be completely different.
 
This being said, could you give us an idea of what your assets and liabilities are. How you're doing this? How many properties you have, the type of income they're pulling in. That sort of thing. So far what you're posting seems pretty vague, so when you say that others can do what you've done, it personally makes me quite anxious thinking of doing it. With a better picture of your situation, that might be completely different.

+1,000 - I think many of us are quite curious about the size of the RE portfolio needed to generate enough passive income for OP to live off of, what that level of income is, what their expenses are, etc.

Also - with 8% management fees plus the need to pay-off existing mortgage debts, property taxes, repair/improvement/etc, it's equally unclear how the RE investments are generating any significant "net" income at all.

Without insight on these topics, this is all extremely vague and it would seem quite imprudent given the lack of hard numbers and data for anyone to follow the path taken by OP..
 
Last edited:
There’s neither angst nor offense. Some members want to understand more, peel back the onion, see the details. This has been explained. If you don’t want to engage with them, don’t complain about it, just ignore and move on.

The choir (or lumpen slums of cyberspace as we've notably been called) is still interested, and asking to know more, even in a manner that the OP might find offensive but that we are used to, doesn't change that.

I think you’ll see I’ve been very engaged and completely open…with any and all questions. Im providing info to "peel back the onion" as fast as its asked/requested...


My comment about the thread being (seemingly) ill-received is more a reference to the several pointless posts that ask no questions whatsoever and merely seem pointed at belittling someone.
Im thick skinned and don't really care, but if that is truly the “typical style” of how communication and collaboration go here… it's probably not for me.

Im looking for a place to try and help others as they come up and are looking for paths to succeed, not to push them down so I can feel better about myself.

I would agree with a couple other poster that the OPs style is very course/aggressive. If you’re trying to influence people, I wouldn’t suggest aggressively and combatively telling people something.
I appreciate the feedback and will try to be more careful… but if you look back the aggressive behavior was only in response to aggressive comments.
Regardless… thanks for the reminder to keep taking the higher road.

As for the plan - typical house price appreciation is “3-5%” yet OP expects it to match stock returns?
Not “expects it to match stock returns”…
they DID match (and surpass) during our prime investing years of 2002-2016!
The Portland property value index more than doubled in those same years, and we outperformed that.

I’m not sure its the best example, but here’s the chart of REIT compared to S&P…
Stocks-vs-Real-Estate-Combined.png

if you then take into account that some cities (Portland being one) didn’t actually nose dive during the housing crisis of 07/08 they simply slowed their growth slightly before taking off again…its astronomical the difference.

As stated in my last post- I bought my first house in 2002 for 0% down.
We bought out first investment property in 2005 with no money out of pocket because it all came from a refi on the first house (so on and so forth basically for our entire portfolio).


Also OP is paying ‘8%management fee’ and based on previous ‘wing it financially’ it isn’t clear if they are accruing major repair costs (on the house or boat?)
8% management, yes.
"Wing it" financially? Not even close. You may not choose real estate or the path weve taken... but nowhere in this story is "wing it".

No, we are not “accruing major repair costs (on the house or boat). That's the whole idea of paying the management team, so that repairs/upgrades are done as/before they are needed.

In fact if you’ve read other parts of the thread you’ll also see that several of the properties just went through a massive remodel in the last few years that not only updated the property but split it into two units to increase the passive income. They are all in great shape!

In terms of the boat, we are (of course) still adapting to exactly how expensive and constant boat upkeep is compared to a house, but again... wouldn't call the boat an investment to begin with.


As stated - OP want to share the message that you can take major risks and so long as you get lucky (like buying real estate in a during a downturn in an area that ends up highly appreciating) it will turn out alright.

Your words not mine.
Never did I say anything about luck, and nowhere in our financial/passive income/retirement plan was luck either a plan or a factor.

Wise investing (only buying the most affordable homes in the best possible neighborhoods in an up and coming city where rent housing stock is almost nonexistent), a LOTT of work/remodels after the 9-5 to increase value, foresight and creativity, YES!
Luck?? No! At least no more than you might be looking for in the S&P.
 
All good questions that I clearly am not studied up on enough to answer well.
As embarrassed as I am to admit it... I had to google ACA last night to know what was being asked.

We've (clearly) never really thought/worried much about health care other than the fact we are required to have it. That was the only concern, as we always assume we'll just get local coverage somewhere when something pops up... now 7years later its a good reminder we should actually start caring/looking into it.

Back when we left it was a mess... we were well into Mexico when our employers' plans ran out and so we called/set things up from afar. Obviously that first year we had to pay for the minimum/disaster only plan.

The next year the "broker" (if thats what he would be called) suggested the ACA/free plan and we opted in but later opted out again. Some of my family and many people where I grew are on welfare despite not really needing to be and it left a bad taste in my mouth. We ran away from our jobs but still always felt like we should be "paying our own way" rather than someone else paying for us.
I guess that's why we also never put one of those "buy us a taco/beer" links up either... i'd rather someone fund their own happiness and leave me to fund my own.

Obviously since Mexico we've had some years where we would have qualified (for ACA) and some where we wouldn't... but we basically call the guy once a year and tell him to re-up whatever is most similar to the plan we had last (which seems to keep going up in price and changing to lesser quality insurers because in OR they keep going out of business every year).

Again... we're woefully undereducated in this area, but this is a good reminder that we're coming to an age where we should work under something other than the "ocean heals all" philosophy thats gotten us this far. :blush:


If you are paying $350 a month per person for disaster coverage, then that means you do not qualify for an ACA plan with subsidies these past couple of years, is that right? That means your small passive taxable income has to be greater than around $65,850 a year for two, even after depreciation and other deductions on your rentals, since that is the ACA maximum income limit and you said you had no other income these past two years.


Just curious what the ROI is for the rental income only (not appreciation) on your properties to make over $65K in income annually, net of mortgages, management fees, repairs, vacancies, etc.? Assuming even a 6.5% return on net rental income only, wouldn't you need over $1M in real estate to produce that kind of income? I don't know a lot about rental properties but am curious to learn more.
 
If you are paying $350 a month per person for disaster coverage, then that means you do not qualify for an ACA plan with subsidies these past couple of years, is that right? That means your small passive taxable income has to be greater than around $65,850 a year for two, even after depreciation and other deductions on your rentals, since that is the ACA maximum income limit and you said you had no other income these past two years.

Already answered this a few posts back. It's not quite that cut and dry, unfortunately.
Our income has changed drastically year by year and we haven't even checked each year since maybe 2014 to see if we are eligible because (for reasons already stated) Im not really comfortable being on ACA unless it's an absolute necessity (which it hasn't been).


wouldn't you need over $1M in real estate to produce that kind of income? I don't know a lot about rental properties but am curious to learn more.
If you mean in current market value, it is over... I would guess closer to $3M
but we need to update some spreadsheets, which hasn't happened for a while (funny how that used to happen daily when trying to reach FI and then once the passive income gets started those numbers seem okay a bit vague)
 
I appreciate the engagement and response.

A lot to quote back but my view the real estate property in Portland skyrocketing way above the 3-5% and above stocks is that luck component I was talking about. Plenty of popular cities grow fast until they don’t. If it was certain Portland would grow, everyone would buy property there. I’m glad it worked out for you; right now we’re looking at hindsight.

Major repairs can happen - theft of AC coil, pipe leak, water heater breaking, hail damage, roof replacement, vacancy, boat through-hull failure. I agree probability is low but many people in the financial planning space are conservative and would feel uncomfortable without a plan for that. In fact many sailing forums are similarly conservative on how much money you should have set aside for repairs vs cost of boat. (Many suggest cash reserves almost equal to boat cost).
 
"If you mean in current market value, it is over... I would guess closer to $3M"

But how much of that $3,000,000 is leverage. Leverage is a funny thing. For all of the accelerated gains you get from a rising market, the trip on the way back down is just as accelerated. I'm sure you know this. 2008 revealed countless homeowners who were underwater, due to leverage. You seem very talented though and appear to have used a lot of sweat equity, so if your equity is healthy, you should be OK. Portland's housing market has stagnated of late, I've heard. Hopefully it won't affect the rental market.

Of and I'm not sure if you know that Robert Kowasaki filed for bankruptcy last year. His reputation has always been pretty sketchy, with MLM and other schemes.
 
Last edited:
"If you mean in current market value, it is over... I would guess closer to $3M"

But how much of that $3,000,000 is leverage. Leverage is a funny thing. For all of the accelerated gains you get from a rising market, the trip on the way back down is just as accelerated. I'm sure you know this. 2008 revealed countless homeowners who were underwater, due to leverage. You seem very talented though and appear to have used a lot of sweat equity, so if your equity is healthy, you should be OK. Portland's housing market has stagnated of late, I've heard. Hopefully it won't affect the rental market.

Of and I'm not sure if you know that Robert Kowasaki filed for bankruptcy last year. His reputation has always been pretty sketchy.

I'm assuming you mean Robert Kiyosaki, and if so, I don't think he did file for bankruptcy last year. His company filed in 2012, but he's got a net worth of $80 million last I checked.
 
Last edited:
If you mean in current market value, it is over... I would guess closer to $3M but we need to update some spreadsheets, which hasn't happened for a while (funny how that used to happen daily when trying to reach FI and then once the passive income gets started those numbers seem okay a bit vague)


That is a very intriguing lifestyle change from living in a van to a $500K sail boat and $3M of rental property. As others have asked, I'm curious how much of that is leverage? How many years from van life to the $3.5M in property?
 
Yes. Kiyosaki. But this article indicates that his company filed last year. Perhaps this is his second go around.

https://thecollegeinvestor.com/4726/ultimate-hypocrite-robert-kiyosaki-companys-bankruptcy/

The article you cite was written in 2012, but updated in 2018. They should really make that more clear.

From my understanding (albeit limited and I haven't closely looked into it), it was financially advantageous for his company to go bankrupt rather than pay the heavy fine and was within the bounds of the law. Moral and ethical? Well, that's another discussion. Again, I'm not 100% on this last point.

But either way, he's got more in his coffers today than I'm likely to ever amass.
 
I appreciate the engagement and response.

A lot to quote back but my view the real estate property in Portland skyrocketing way above the 3-5% and above stocks is that luck component I was talking about. Plenty of popular cities grow fast until they don’t. If it was certain Portland would grow, everyone would buy property there. I’m glad it worked out for you; right now we’re looking at hindsight.
Of course we are.
That's all we can do is look back at any/all investments over the same period and see what happened.
The simple fact is it was (in that time period) not only a better investment, but it also gave us the very real and very needed opportunity to impact the growth (and offset setbacks) in real time, which the stock market simply wouldn't have done/didn't do.

Did a good market help, of course it did (that's why we continued to invest in it).
But we also worked our asses off for what we have. We renovated homes after work hours while we had jobs.
After returning from our trip we completely redesigned our life and our properties in a couple months... we converted single families to duplexes almost doubled gains.
No way that was happening with luck alone, or on a standard "wait and see" plan.

Major repairs can happen - theft of AC coil, pipe leak, water heater breaking, hail damage, roof replacement, vacancy, boat through-hull failure. I agree probability is low but
In case you think we aren't profoundly aware of repair costs-

Just like everyone else making any investments, we had our bad investments/losses. We've had our repair costs and problems, weve had our bad tenants....
Also why i'm such a proponent for hiring a management company despite the fees - if youre in this for the long game you have to take the stress out of the equation and make it a line item like any other expense.

I mentioned earlier a "bad investment" out of state... no way to describe exactly how bad that was.
To keep it short (though looking back its an almost funny story)... We moved in our first night after driving half way across the country towing all our remaining belongings and had to kick out vagrants from midnight to 3am.
We learned the next day that we had bought the (still very active) drug and prostitute house in town. Awesome!
Probably my fault, I did tell our realtor we wanted an "up and coming neighborhood" :mad:

In addition to finding out that we had to essentially rehab the entire neighborhood image, chase cons away in the middle of the night 3-4 nights a week as they got out of the state pen and came directly to us for drugs, convince prostitutes that our bay window was no longer a drive up "pay-the-pimp" window. Every wire, pipe, fixture and appliance in the place had to be replaced because it wasn't prepped the winter before.
10 years later we barely broke even (and that's if you DON'T count the blood sweat and tears or a solid year of our lives).

Even in Portland, we've also had hoarders, we've had people withhold rent for months on end, we've had failing foundations, broken beams in a basement, we've had water damage, mold and infestations....

Again, I've never once attempted to paint this as a "golden egg" or a walk in the park.


many people in the financial planning space are conservative and would feel uncomfortable without a plan for that. In fact many sailing forums are similarly conservative on how much money you should have set aside for repairs vs cost of boat. (Many suggest cash reserves almost equal to boat cost).
This is part of why Ive found so much of this thread humorous...
I would have always considered us/described us as extremely conservative as well!

We bought smart in a market where people were buying vacation homes and jetskis, and instead of taking hard money, credit card debt and balloon mortgages, we did tons of research research to buy only in the best neighborhoods already starving for rental stock, took good rates/terms and never - ever overextended ourselves.

I don't know what's more conservative than moving into a van to reduce your overhead. We didn't even own dryer sheets for crying out loud. :LOL:

Im not saying that the path we followed didn't have good, bad and ugly... im just saying that anyone who's committed to this with enough fire, passion and willingness can actually control their own future... and for many who are sitting at a job they hate looking at 3 more decades fo work - that might just be a decent and/or acceptable option.

Why would I suggest that after all the experiences listed above??

Because if the goal (which ours was) is to find FI and to RE as fast as possible...
I think we all know that it is all but impossible for us to be sitting where we are today if we had only employed the standard plan of a 401k match and a decent run at the markets.

The fact that we chose real estate allowed us to be active participants, and after we travelled and realized we had a desire to make this move permanent - no other path i'm aware of could have allowed us to move our plans into even higher gear in such a short amount of time (and on very limited funds) and literally move us from losing money every month to passive income flow, much less being able to chase a lifelong dream at the same time.

Sorry... for what somehow turned into a very long response :facepalm:
Never let it be said again that i'm not answering questions to help unpeel the onion. :D
 
Actually I think it makes perfect sense, especially when a couple don't have kids. Pregnancy and kids can be wild cards, health-wise. Many of us win that bet, but those who don't...phew!

But after age 60, all bets are off.

I don't think a catastrophic health plan is that risky for a younger, healthy person. The important thing is that you're covered on the high side, in case a major illness or accident happens. .
 
But how much of that $3M is leverage. Leverage is a funny thing. For all of the accelerated gains you get from a rising market, the trip on the way back down is just as accelerated. I'm sure you know this. 2008 revealed countless homeowners who were underwater, due to leverage.

We lived through 2008 as well (smaller investors maybe, but nonetheless) and we were obviously terrified as many people we knew turned their keys back over to the bank.
Awesome time for us as we bought a property literally days before the bottom dropped out, AND we had a tenant in our house at the time (a lawyer making 3x what we did combined) who refused to pay rent for a few months due to ‘hardships”… even though he was just trying to avoid paying alimony to his ex… clearly a solid guy).

Most of those people who turned keys over had made bad decisions with bad loans.
Honestly, most weren’t making investments… they were buying vacation homes, big screen tvs and jet skis (yes… and also some boats - I am aware the irony is in there).

We will see what happens, as always.
Portland is still far short on needed rental units so hopefully even though the market is flattening a bit it won't impact rents terribly.
Much like in stocks… if you don’t sell you haven’t locked in any losses (and we really have no plans to sell anything unless its to take on a much bigger project elsewhere).

But...if things got bad enough who ever knows??
Can I imagine a world where even though we aren’t what I would call over-leveraged, we still wake up to an economic disaster where all rents suddenly drop well below the mortgages, we can’t make our payments, can’t sell anything (house or boat) to get more cash, etc… sure.

But that's no different than the fears I had (before any investments) of a tanking economy where I lost my job and couldn’t afford the mortgage on my house… and at this point if things turn that far sour - i'm afraid all other markets are going to crash just as hard, and my finances might just be the least of all our worries.

All I can tell you is that we will try to adapt to changing conditions as we have so far...
 
By now, it's clear that BryDanger took great risks, worked hard, and eventually reaped great rewards. The story was nowhere near complete in the beginning, but now, most of the holes have been filled in a fairly random (but apparently almost complete manner). While Bry doesn't acknowledge luck in his real estate investments, being in the right place at the right time can make all of the difference.

I had exactly one opportunity in Hawaii to make a lot of leveraged money in real estate. It was 1998, and entry-level condos had just bottomed out, after falling from the $200Ks to around $80K. At the time, I could only afford to buy one, but had I had a larger amount of $, I would have bought three or four. These same condos went up to the mid $300Ks before falling back to the $200Ks, and now probably back again.

Had the OP been living, say, in OK, or TX, or someplace with less growth potential, such growth in real estate might not have been as easy or regular.

I understand that while the % rate of return on real estate may be less than the markets, because you're leveraging your $, you may make effectively up to 10X the rate that the market appreciates, even before rental income.

Well done, Bry...you recognized trends, evaluated risks, and took your chances...and won!
 
Back
Top Bottom