Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-14-2021, 09:12 AM   #21
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain skier View Post
Our AA: 27/73 (cash, not bonds)

Thanks
Just to make sure I understand, you are 73% cash? Any concern your remaining portfolio will not be able to keep up with the cost of living?
SALTedOut is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 05-14-2021, 09:13 AM   #22
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sarasota, FL & Vermont
Posts: 36,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain skier View Post
The area we are considering: housing is quite expensive...$1M for 1500 sq ft homes built in 1970's-1990's...problem could be in having to upgrade or fix existing issues. The houses aren't necessarily large but older.

But the issue becomes do we go for lifestyle...does one "go for it"?...being house rich cash poor to live in an area for lifestyle.....it is a dilemma.
With a mortgage you can have the best of both worlds... take the $350k value of your current home as a down payment and get a $650k mortgage. At 3%/30 years that would be $2,750/month but your home equity would be the same $350k as it is today. The $2,750 (plus increased property taxes and other costs) is the cost of the lifestyle choice.

As long as your portolio return exceeds your mortgage rate then you are good.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.

Retired Jan 2012 at age 56
pb4uski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2021, 09:19 AM   #23
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
With a mortgage you can have the best of both worlds... take the $350k value of your current home as a down payment and get a $650k mortgage. At 3%/30 years that would be $2,750/month but your home equity would be the same $350k as it is today. The $2,750 (plus increased property taxes and other costs) is the cost of the lifestyle choice.

As long as your portolio return exceeds your mortgage rate then you are good.
Interesting idea...thanks pb4uski
Mountain skier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2021, 10:13 AM   #24
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
OldShooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: City
Posts: 10,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
With a mortgage you can have the best of both worlds... take the $350k value of your current home as a down payment and get a $650k mortgage. At 3%/30 years that would be $2,750/month but your home equity would be the same $350k as it is today. The $2,750 (plus increased property taxes and other costs) is the cost of the lifestyle choice.

As long as your portolio return exceeds your mortgage rate then you are good.
Not necessarily criticizing, but this is essentially the same as buying on margin, right? Arbitrage the certain loan rate vs the hoped-for investment gains.
__________________
Ignoramus et ignorabimus
OldShooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2021, 10:33 AM   #25
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Sunset's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Spending the Kids Inheritance and living in Chicago
Posts: 17,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
With a mortgage you can have the best of both worlds... take the $350k value of your current home as a down payment and get a $650k mortgage. At 3%/30 years that would be $2,750/month but your home equity would be the same $350k as it is today. The $2,750 (plus increased property taxes and other costs) is the cost of the lifestyle choice.

As long as your portolio return exceeds your mortgage rate then you are good.
I think this is a good idea/bet , one I'm personally tempted with should we move.

I think the market over the next 30 yrs will return on avg more than 3%, plus now that inflation appears to be over it's decline, the inflation will drive indexed things like SS to increase possibly even higher than 3% in some years.

OP would have mortgage interest costs of $19,500 add in the high property tax and they probably will be itemizing their deductions for the next decade.
__________________
Fortune favors the prepared mind. ... Louis Pasteur
Sunset is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2021, 11:05 AM   #26
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sarasota, FL & Vermont
Posts: 36,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldShooter View Post
Not necessarily criticizing, but this is essentially the same as buying on margin, right? Arbitrage the certain loan rate vs the hoped-for investment gains.
I guess one could view it that way.

But the risk of a mortgage and a risk of margin are totally different because the interest rate paid on the loan is totally different so the net risk is different. With a mortgage then the investments that would have been sold had you not gone with a mortgage only need to yield more than the mortgage rate over 30 years for the borrower to come out ahead. With margin the interest paid is much higher therefore the return needed to win is much high higher... plus the timeframe is much shorter so volatility can kick you a$$. Plus, there is no such thing as a margin call on a house so it really isn't even close the same thing.

What about all those people who can't buy a home for cash but instead make a down payment and then take a mortgage loan for the rest? I guess that they are real risk takers!
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.

Retired Jan 2012 at age 56
pb4uski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2021, 11:21 AM   #27
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Dallas
Posts: 1,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldShooter View Post
Not necessarily criticizing, but this is essentially the same as buying on margin, right? Arbitrage the certain loan rate vs the hoped-for investment gains.
Few key differences:
1. 30 year fixed rate is WAAAY lower than one you pay for margin.
2. The rate you pay is (nominal - inflation) which could be negative in the future, which further drives down the real rate of interest.
3. No margin call EVER and lender will not forcefully liquidate your asset unless you stop paying mortgage.
4. Access to otherwise locked up equity at least during the first decade of mortgage.

I think the idea of financing is actually a very good one if OP really wants to enjoy a nice house in RE. It is a personal choice and mortgage may allow them to live life with minimal downside to their finances.


PS:

OP,

If you decide to finance the next house then be sure to invest the "saved equity" into some board market mutual funds or index funds. If you keep that money saved up in cash then you will be losing real money over time and the whole theory of mortgage benefits will fall apart.
pjigar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2021, 11:27 AM   #28
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 129
We haven't had a mortgage in a very long time and never thought we'd ever get one again however with rates very low and housing becoming very expensive it might be a reasonable solution.

I don't know if getting a mortgage is difficult for a retiree...but we have mostly income from pension with SS a few years away. You'd think a state teacher pension and SS would be considered a safe and reliable income stream...certainly more secure than a job.
Mountain skier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2021, 01:09 PM   #29
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
With a mortgage you can have the best of both worlds... take the $350k value of your current home as a down payment and get a $650k mortgage. At 3%/30 years that would be $2,750/month but your home equity would be the same $350k as it is today. The $2,750 (plus increased property taxes and other costs) is the cost of the lifestyle choice.

As long as your portolio return exceeds your mortgage rate then you are good.
His AA is 27/73 (cash, not bonds)...
tmm99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2021, 01:34 PM   #30
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldShooter View Post
A slight rephrase might be:
the departing folks are more likely to be the ones who can afford $1M houses, and the immigrants are mostly folks who cannot.
Do you have a source for that? The opposite seems to be true...."Are rich people fleeing California to escape astronomical state income taxes? That’s the word. But it’s fake news....In fact, more wealthy people are moving to California than leaving, research indicates. It’s the poor and middle class who are departing." https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-...311-story.html

More Californians left for other states in 2018 | The Sacramento Bee (sacbee.com)
A 2017 Bee analysis found that people leaving California tended to be relatively poor, and many lacked college degrees. Higher up the income spectrum, slightly more people were coming than going.

'Not the Golden State anymore': Middle- and low-income people leaving California | CalMatters
Middle and Low Income People Leaving California - U.S. Census Bureau numbers show that the middle- and lower class are leaving California at a higher rate than the wealthy. Many who left in recent years say they simply couldn't afford to stay...The majority of people leaving reported an annual income of less than $100,000. while the state has seen an influx of those making $100,000 and more."
__________________
Even clouds seem bright and breezy, 'Cause the livin' is free and easy, See the rat race in a new way, Like you're wakin' up to a new day (Dr. Tarr and Professor Fether lyrics, Alan Parsons Project, based on an EA Poe story)
daylatedollarshort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2021, 01:44 PM   #31
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sarasota, FL & Vermont
Posts: 36,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmm99 View Post
His AA is 27/73 (cash, not bonds)...
Yes, but even if future returns are only 1/2 of what historical returns have been for that AA the OP would easily cover a 3% mortgage. I guess it depends on what their "cash" is in... over 50% of my retirement is in CDs that have a weighted average yield of 2.94%... some would consider CDs as cash.

Source: https://investor.vanguard.com/invest...lio-allocation
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Capture.JPG (83.1 KB, 49 views)
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.

Retired Jan 2012 at age 56
pb4uski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2021, 02:01 PM   #32
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain skier View Post
Is this a feasible idea? I realize my financial comfort level would drop quite a bit. What do you folks think about this?

Thanks
I live in an older home in a coastal California, though I didn't buy it recently. I think at current prices I would not buy the same size house. If it were me, I would definitely still move, buy something smaller and get a mortgage, locking in historically low rates as pb4uski suggested. If you get a fixed rate and rates go down you can always refinance, and if rates go up you've locked in a great rate for 30 years.

Otherwise you have to be prepared that there could easily be a 30% or maybe more dip in prices in the near future that may not recover for years. Housing here goes in boom and bust periods, and it has been awhile since we had a bust. A bigger home means not just higher prices, but higher property taxes, insurance, utility bills, and upkeep. Earthquake insurance, if you choose to buy it, probably cost at least several thousand a year on top of homeowners insurance with something like a $100K deductible.

We know a number of people who moved here in retirement from our senior clubs. The people with your level of income / assets seem to be more inclined to buy lock and go kind of condos, like in a nice golf course community or walkable urban area with theater and restaurant amenities, and still have money for travel and entertainment. Some keep their "back home" homes. The ones who buy the seven figures homes are usually the ones who seem to be really rich and aren't price sensitive to even housing prices.
__________________
Even clouds seem bright and breezy, 'Cause the livin' is free and easy, See the rat race in a new way, Like you're wakin' up to a new day (Dr. Tarr and Professor Fether lyrics, Alan Parsons Project, based on an EA Poe story)
daylatedollarshort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2021, 12:04 AM   #33
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Koolau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Leeward Oahu
Posts: 17,794
Someone here a lot more savvy on the "search" function can probably find it, but I'm pretty sure we've done a poll (or 2 or 3) about House as %of Net Worth. IIRC, the sweet spot might have been around 20%. I think 50% +/- would have been unusual. More than 50% "house" may be a real outlier.

Also, I know we "argued" a bit, but "most" of us came down on the side of the argument "Is house value really a part of what you consider your invested NW?" Most said they ignore house value (IIRC) when thinking about their invested NW.

I understand the allure of beach or ocean or just close-to-the-ocean location (remember, location, location, location?). My condo overlooks the ocean and I love it. BUT, I'd never get even close to 50% of NW in my residence (unless it were some necessity for reasons other than personal desire.)

NOW, having said all this, it is YOUR retirement and your money. What brings you happiness is not my business, so you gotta do what brings you happiness - as long as you understand any other issues.

Let us know where you end up. And remember that YMMV.
__________________
Ko'olau's Law -

Anything which can be used can be misused. Anything which can be misused will be.
Koolau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2021, 12:12 AM   #34
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Koolau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Leeward Oahu
Posts: 17,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bamaman View Post
The question is how cheap are you buying the house? Current market value? Or, is it a buy too good to pass up? Could you turn that house any day and get back your initial investment?

I ask these things because you may be the most middle class person in your neighborhood. And money doesn't grow on trees when you're no longer working.

My sister had a condo in Aspen for 15 years, and she sold it in 2007 at the top of the market. With the proceeds, she bought a house in the NC mountains that's now worth $1.5 million plus a LearJet 45 to fly back and forth in.
Please tell me you're pulling our leg. No wait! Please tell me you're NOT pulling our leg. I think this would be cool beyond belief.
__________________
Ko'olau's Law -

Anything which can be used can be misused. Anything which can be misused will be.
Koolau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2021, 02:31 AM   #35
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 572
Is it really feasible from a lending standpoint? Can you qualify for a $650K mortgage on a $1M home with $35K of annual income? It seems like the bank's ratios would be very challenging with your numbers. Especially since you are both at least a couple of years away from collecting any SS income at all. They really want to see regular cash flow that is more than adequate to service the loan.
Even if you both were 62 and took SS, you'd still only have $67K in income in CA which is still not a lot of income for a loan that costs close to $50K per year. Your current assets will likely not be factored into the loan decision.
You might want to see if you could qualify for a $1M loan @65% LTV and see what it would really cost before you worry about whether to move forward or not. It may be better for you to rent than to own.
Starsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2021, 04:54 AM   #36
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
bclover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: philly
Posts: 1,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain skier View Post
The location we are thinking is near the Pacific Ocean and yes house prices are quite high. It is not the size of house but location and lifestyle it offers that we are interested in.

But I agree with you in that I have always preferred to have most of our net worth in liquidity not housing...so this would be the direct opposite....which is a bit concerning and why I am seeking counsel.

It appears we can financially do this but a concern is if the real estate market has a big correction...suddenly our primary part of our net worth would drop potentially a lot. The liquidity part of our net worth would be lower with this purchase and if there is a big real estate correction one can see the danger in this scenario.
But why would that matter if you're planning on making this your retirement home?

My friend did this and has had no problems. Upsized to a beach house on the Maryland shore. Brought it for the lifestyle. Living by the beach and all that entails. Now of course no one can predict the future but are you planning on needing the liquidity in your house for something?
bclover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2021, 06:13 AM   #37
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,181
I put a high priority on home and lifestyle in retirement. Many retired people spend the majority of their time in and around home, so it's important that you have a place you really enjoy.

A little more than year ago, right before prices skyrocketed, we bought a house that was twice as expensive as our current house at the time. I wake up everyday enjoying the new house and especially the location. This new house is less than 14% of our NW, and the appreciation over the last year has been phenomenal based on recent sales prices in the same area. While the new house is larger and taxes are higher, the utilities and repairs are lower since it is a newer, better constructed, better insulated house. So although our overall expenses have risen slightly, the comfort and location have increased our enjoyment of life dramatically. After all, this is what we worked hard to be able to do if we chose to do so.
freedomatlast is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2021, 07:00 AM   #38
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Dallas
Posts: 1,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by freedomatlast View Post
I put a high priority on home and lifestyle in retirement. ....

This new house is less than 14% of our NW.
And that's the rub in OP's case. OP is trying to spend about 59% of Networth on a house which IMHO is little too high even during retirement.

PS: FWIW our forever home (for now!) is about 15% of NW today. It may represent even smaller percentage of NW in the retirement if other assets + savings grow faster than the house.
pjigar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2021, 09:03 AM   #39
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
GTFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Ormond Beach
Posts: 1,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjigar View Post
Few key differences:
1. 30 year fixed rate is WAAAY lower than one you pay for margin.
Not necessarily, Interactive Brokers offers margins at less than 3%, Schwab has a pledged asset credit line at less than 3%. Tied to current low interbank rates, of course, so they could go up over time. And of course tied to margin calls if market tanks.
GTFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2021, 09:09 AM   #40
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 129
concerning % RE value NW....would one include pension value to overall NW?...if so a $1M house would be 36% of our NW. This does not include SS....if I include SS the $1M becomes 26%. I calculated values as if living into our early 90's.
Mountain skier is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
House Rich and Cash Poor doneat54 FIRE and Money 77 07-12-2021 10:55 AM
Cash poor, retirement fund rich Sniggle Young Dreamers 76 01-01-2021 12:39 AM
Poor habits lead to poor future~an old concept mickeyd Other topics 0 05-29-2006 10:24 AM
Rich/Poor Gap laurence Other topics 8 06-15-2005 03:54 PM
Rich Dad Poor Dad series laurence Other topics 1 02-23-2005 06:21 PM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:44 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.