The Wilsons - 875 buy to let property empire

Max_Headroom_3

He said: “Prices of two and three-bedroom properties may go down by one or two per cent, but they will not be rising for at least two or three years. This is what has accelerated us selling.”

“Government and councils cannot divorce themselves from consumer demand; people want houses these days. Even now two and three-bedroom homes in Ashford are going at the asking price, but they have not been selling in many numbers,” he said.

Mr Wilson added he was now exploring working on a TV programme offering people financial advice.

http://www.kentnews.co.uk/kent-news/We-will-not-flood-market-vows-millionaire-landlord-newsinkent17025.aspx

No words, just..

WAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Oh alright, one word.

DREAMER!!!

neverdespairgirl

poppy10 wrote: »

He said: “Prices of two and three-bedroom properties may go down by one or two per cent, but they will not be rising for at least two or three years. This is what has accelerated us selling.”

1-2%. Yes dear.

Generali

chucky wrote: »

no but they could parcel up 100 into lots and solve the financial problem they may have.

that's why i asked what was the problem with their company, what is the finance amount that they need - we all know that they are over extended.

If they could do that then why not just sell the whole thing as a going concern?

I wonder if they have negative cashflow and so are having to borrow to maintain their interest payments and maintenance costs. It would explain why they can't sell it as a single business.

stevetodd

Generali wrote: »

If they could do that then why not just sell the whole thing as a going concern?

I wonder if they have negative cashflow and so are having to borrow to maintain their interest payments and maintenance costs. It would explain why they can't sell it as a single business.

But the thing is who would want to buy this business now when you could wait a year or 2 and pick it up cheaply from the liquidator

chucky

Generali wrote: »

If they could do that then why not just sell the whole thing as a going concern?

I wonder if they have negative cashflow and so are having to borrow to maintain their interest payments and maintenance costs. It would explain why they can't sell it as a single business.

i don't know, that's was the reason for my initial question.

negative cashflow sounds like the possible reason.

RDB

stevetodd wrote: »

I can't see anyone or organisation willing to buy into a market that is falling so steeply unless the prices were seriously discounted by about 20% at least and only then if that produced very good yields as prices are likely to fall by more than 20% from this point in time

20% are you serious, The Wilsons could only ever dream of such lunacy.

Even if someone came up with a 50% offer right now to buy a BTL property would the yield be worth it long term? even if the rents cover the rising interest payments and costs and maintenance, as the rents go lower due to recession the average mortgage payments are going to go up.

I maintain BTL still isn't worth it at 50% in these times.

The only time you could get a good yield was years ago when you could buy a house for 40K and rent it out 100wk. Those times have gone but will come back, but where will the money come from - banks?

Lotus-eater

Generali wrote: »

If they could do that then why not just sell the whole thing as a going concern?

I wonder if they have negative cashflow and so are having to borrow to maintain their interest payments and maintenance costs. It would explain why they can't sell it as a single business.

They must have negative cashflow as he has said that (even they) have lost a couple of million in the credit crunch.

Its all funny isn't it, she says that there will be a fund for investing in their property and the guarantee it will double every 7 years, he's going to be a big TV star, like the Dragons den lot...innit.

The private dentists, the other big plans........... then suddenly they are selling everything.
Did someone suddenly get a big chill, feel a loosening of the bowels?
I think so.

stevetodd

RDB wrote: »

20% are you serious, The Wilsons could only ever dream of such lunacy.

Even if someone came up with a 50% offer right now the yield wouldnt be worth it long term, even if the rents cover the rising interest payments, as the rents go lower due to recession the average mortgage payments are going to go up.

I maintain BTL still isn't worth it at 50% in these times.

The only time you could get a good yield was years ago when you could buy a house for 40K and rent it out 100wk. Those times have gone but will come back, but where will the money come from - banks?

Well I personally wouldn't get involved at 20% I was resonding to someone sugessting that they sold it at face value! However at 50% it would be a dream buy, and I would certainly get involved (obvioulsy I could not afford to buy their full portfolio).

I don't know anything about the Ashford rental market (perhaps someone who does could comment) but if we assume that they achieve an average yield of say 4.5% (based on a quick look at both values and rentals on findaproperty.com) at current prices, then if they were discounted by 50% that would produce an average yield of 9%.

Also if you bought at 50% off you could offload say 5% of your portfolio at say 30% off, which would raise the yield on the remaining properties (due to the 20% subsidy ie buying 50% off but selling at 30% off), although this wouldn't be great value if you were disposing of something producing a 9% yiled. Although I would be tempted analyse their portfolio and pick out the lower yield properties and sell those (in small numbers obvioulsy).

GDB2222

stevetodd wrote: »

Well I personally wouldn't get involved at 20% I was resonding to someone sugessting that they sold it at face value! However at 50% it would be a dream buy, and I would certainly get involved (obvioulsy I could not afford to buy their full portfolio).

I don't know anything about the Ashford rental market (perhaps someone who does could comment) but if we assume that they achieve an average yield of say 4.5% (based on a quick look at both values and rentals on findaproperty.com) at current prices, then if they were discounted by 50% that would produce an average yield of 9%.

Also if you bought at 50% off you could offload say 5% of your portfolio at say 30% off, which would raise the yield on the remaining properties (due to the 20% subsidy ie buying 50% off but selling at 30% off), although this wouldn't be great value if you were disposing of something producing a 9% yiled. Although I would be tempted analyse their portfolio and pick out the lower yield properties and sell those (in small numbers obvioulsy).

I don't think that 9% is a dream yield at all. Financing costs would (currently) be say 7%, so that's only 2% to pay for all the admin, voids, maintenance. there's the risk of falling rents. It might be viable, but hardly a gold-mine.

I agree, though, that selling off as many as you could would be the way to go. If the discount is good enough, you'd have lots of buyers amongst the existing tenants.

Anyway, let's see what happens.

stevetodd

GDB2222 wrote: »

I don't think that 9% is a dream yield at all. Financing costs would (currently) be say 7%, so that's only 2% to pay for all the admin, voids, maintenance. there's the risk of falling rents. It might be viable, but hardly a gold-mine.

I agree, though, that selling off as many as you could would be the way to go. If the discount is good enough, you'd have lots of buyers amongst the existing tenants.

Anyway, let's see what happens.

Read my answer on the other thread, ie about the yield, the yield needs analysing more deeply than simply expressing it as gross rent to purchase price