5 ms·

Its spread across about ~ 6 houses. I'm definitely a small landlord. I deal with all tenant issues myself, handle all repairs, leases, and most importantly for

Its spread across about ~ 6 houses. I'm definitely a small landlord. I deal with all tenant issues myself, handle all repairs, leases, and most importantly for me—maintain a healthy relationship (which has grown to many friendships). I use this term in contrast to a faceless, corporate landlord who owns larger apartment buildings. Small landlords and corporate landlords are nothing alike

lovich 3mo ago
Being generous with your ~6 number to be either 5 or 7 houses you have either 7.8-11 people per unit? That's slumlord territory and not any morally better than corporate landlords unless your average unit size is a 4 bed/2 bath. Also there is zero world where you have 6 houses, 50+ people and can call yourself a small time landlord. That's being able to live entirely off of your rental income and a full time landlord. You could maybe, _maybe_ get away with describing yourself as a medium time landlord. Small time is living in a 3 floor house and renting the other 2 floors, or owning 1 other home to rent.
- halfxing 3mo ago
  I'm sure OP meant 6 houses with several units in it each, not 7-11 people per house. Otherwise the distinction between house and unit doesn't make sense. This is a small time landlord. Large landlords have easily over 10000 units, and he is one half of a percent of that. I hope he is able to live off the rental income. It's a big job to manage 55 units and keep everything in shape and administratively going, deal with turnover and so on.
  - lovich 3mo ago
    nah, having 6 buildings(not houses, if were being precise with terminology here) with multiple units in each, is not a small time landlord. If you can live entirely off the rental income then you are a full time landlord and can at best claim that you aren't a large corporate landlord, but you don't get to invoke the idea that you are some sort of mom and pop situation renting out a spare unit, which is what people assume when you say "small time landlord"
    - halfxing 3mo ago
      I didn't invoke a "mon and pop situation renting out a spare unit" idea, that's your own that you're projecting on my comment. I did say that they are a small landlord, and I stand by it given that a large landlord is several orders of magnitude larger than them. If in your world that's only a label you want to give someone renting out a single spare unit, then so be it. I disagree.
      - lovich 3mo ago
        > mon and pop situation renting out a spare unit > small landlord Those are effectively synonymous to me. The line in the sand that definitively makes you not a small time landlord is if you earn enough from rental income after expenses to make as much as the average job's income. If you disagree I will need you to define what "small time landlord" means to you then so we can figure out the gap in our understanding.
        halfxing 3mo ago
        "Small" is a word indicating that quantitatively relative to other things, it is less, i.e. Very Small < Small < Medium < Large < Very Large. According to [1] (Doorloop, 2026), Greystar manages 823,581 units as the largest landlord. The 10th largest landlord is WinnCompanies with 120,855 units. These are "very large" to me. If we make a generous curve then a large landlord has 10% of those units, so somewhere in the 10,000 unit range, a medium landlord 10% of that or 1,000 units, a small landlord 10% of that or 100 units, and a very small landlord has the last interval of 1-10 units. Hence, 55 units is somewhere between very small and small. [1] https://www.doorloop.com/blog/largest-property-management-companies https://www.doorloop.com/blog/largest-property-management-co...
        lovich 3mo ago
        I gave my definition for what a small time landlord is in the comment you replied to. You can disagree with that definition but don’t pretend like I didn’t give one and then explain to me what my beliefs should be.
digitaltrees 3mo ago
55 isn’t small by definition and under the law. You may feel small because it’s just you, and you don’t realize how much you’ve accomplished or the asymmetric bargaining position that affords you but your perspective isn’t corresponding with reality. That being said, I do think a system that tenant rights to be as abusive of legal process as we have in some states ends up hurting tenants themselves. I think our courts should move much faster so nonpayment is resolved faster. But I also think all landlords should be required to pay 20% of rent to a home building fund so that new housing actually gets built.
- Ekaros 3mo ago
  Wouldn't 20% tax on rent just lead to 25% general increase on rents? I don't think there are that much margin around in leveraged landlords. Really better would be just to bump something like income tax and use money from there for same purpose.
  - digitaltrees 3mo ago
    If leads to building that floods the system with supply then rent won’t increase. Landlords and lenders would have to adjust purchase prices and cap rates so valuations would come down. So this would need be gradually phased in until normal. The government would need to support home builders, buyers and landlords. But eventually the housing stock supply increase would match and be tied to new household formation. At the end of the day most economic activity is really an exercise in ratios. Some states don’t charge sales taxes. Some change double digits. Yet retailers are able to function in both environments. What is clear is that rental and purchase housing is increasing beyond inflation since 2008 and COVID and that’s not good for tenants or landlords.
  - hdgvhicv 3mo ago
    If a landlord can charge 1200 instead of 1000 why wouldn’t they? They’ll charge the maximum they can get away with, costs are irrelevant Two landlords, one with a mortgage, one without, will charge the same amount for the same property.
hdgvhicv 3mo ago
So a slumlord

lovich 3mo ago

Being generous with your ~6 number to be either 5 or 7 houses you have either 7.8-11 people per unit? That's slumlord territory and not any morally better than corporate landlords unless your average unit size is a 4 bed/2 bath. Also there is zero world where you have 6 houses, 50+ people and can call yourself a small time landlord. That's being able to live entirely off of your rental income and a full time landlord. You could maybe, _maybe_ get away with describing yourself as a medium time landlord. Small time is living in a 3 floor house and renting the other 2 floors, or owning 1 other home to rent.

halfxing 3mo ago
I'm sure OP meant 6 houses with several units in it each, not 7-11 people per house. Otherwise the distinction between house and unit doesn't make sense. This is a small time landlord. Large landlords have easily over 10000 units, and he is one half of a percent of that. I hope he is able to live off the rental income. It's a big job to manage 55 units and keep everything in shape and administratively going, deal with turnover and so on.
- lovich 3mo ago
  nah, having 6 buildings(not houses, if were being precise with terminology here) with multiple units in each, is not a small time landlord. If you can live entirely off the rental income then you are a full time landlord and can at best claim that you aren't a large corporate landlord, but you don't get to invoke the idea that you are some sort of mom and pop situation renting out a spare unit, which is what people assume when you say "small time landlord"
  - halfxing 3mo ago
    I didn't invoke a "mon and pop situation renting out a spare unit" idea, that's your own that you're projecting on my comment. I did say that they are a small landlord, and I stand by it given that a large landlord is several orders of magnitude larger than them. If in your world that's only a label you want to give someone renting out a single spare unit, then so be it. I disagree.
    - lovich 3mo ago
      > mon and pop situation renting out a spare unit > small landlord Those are effectively synonymous to me. The line in the sand that definitively makes you not a small time landlord is if you earn enough from rental income after expenses to make as much as the average job's income. If you disagree I will need you to define what "small time landlord" means to you then so we can figure out the gap in our understanding.
      - halfxing 3mo ago
        "Small" is a word indicating that quantitatively relative to other things, it is less, i.e. Very Small < Small < Medium < Large < Very Large. According to [1] (Doorloop, 2026), Greystar manages 823,581 units as the largest landlord. The 10th largest landlord is WinnCompanies with 120,855 units. These are "very large" to me. If we make a generous curve then a large landlord has 10% of those units, so somewhere in the 10,000 unit range, a medium landlord 10% of that or 1,000 units, a small landlord 10% of that or 100 units, and a very small landlord has the last interval of 1-10 units. Hence, 55 units is somewhere between very small and small. [1] https://www.doorloop.com/blog/largest-property-management-companies https://www.doorloop.com/blog/largest-property-management-co...
        lovich 3mo ago
        I gave my definition for what a small time landlord is in the comment you replied to. You can disagree with that definition but don’t pretend like I didn’t give one and then explain to me what my beliefs should be.

digitaltrees 3mo ago

55 isn’t small by definition and under the law. You may feel small because it’s just you, and you don’t realize how much you’ve accomplished or the asymmetric bargaining position that affords you but your perspective isn’t corresponding with reality. That being said, I do think a system that tenant rights to be as abusive of legal process as we have in some states ends up hurting tenants themselves. I think our courts should move much faster so nonpayment is resolved faster. But I also think all landlords should be required to pay 20% of rent to a home building fund so that new housing actually gets built.

Ekaros 3mo ago
Wouldn't 20% tax on rent just lead to 25% general increase on rents? I don't think there are that much margin around in leveraged landlords. Really better would be just to bump something like income tax and use money from there for same purpose.
- digitaltrees 3mo ago
  If leads to building that floods the system with supply then rent won’t increase. Landlords and lenders would have to adjust purchase prices and cap rates so valuations would come down. So this would need be gradually phased in until normal. The government would need to support home builders, buyers and landlords. But eventually the housing stock supply increase would match and be tied to new household formation. At the end of the day most economic activity is really an exercise in ratios. Some states don’t charge sales taxes. Some change double digits. Yet retailers are able to function in both environments. What is clear is that rental and purchase housing is increasing beyond inflation since 2008 and COVID and that’s not good for tenants or landlords.
- hdgvhicv 3mo ago
  If a landlord can charge 1200 instead of 1000 why wouldn’t they? They’ll charge the maximum they can get away with, costs are irrelevant Two landlords, one with a mortgage, one without, will charge the same amount for the same property.

hdgvhicv 3mo ago

So a slumlord