Has anyone invested in hotel rooms

Anthorn

bigadaj wrote: »

Did you check the date in that daily mail article, and what happened to one of the two quoted companies some four months later?

Hotel room investments fall into the same box as airport car parking spaces, overseas forestry etc and rarely turn out well for investors.

We can only presume you will be filling your boots with this golden opprotunity and reporting back from you recently purchased Caribbean island.

That's interesting; Do you have a link to that information?

But as far as I can see Galliard Homes referred to in the article is still going and doing very nicely with rooms for sale in several locations:
http://www.galliardhomes.com/

Did you actually read the article?

But I didn't say it is a reliable investment. In fact the article I linked to says it's a strangest form of property investment and it's a waste of time me filling up my post with the same appraisal.

Lastly, if you have read my previous posts you will know that I already own two static caravans in Cap D'Agde which I own along similar lines to the hotel rooms in this thread. I do very nicely with it thank you very much. That's not to say that I will similarly do well with it in the future: Investments can go down as well as up and I accept that. So unlike you, I actually know what I'm talking about.

molit

thanks for all of the replies - It is good that it isn't a complete scam - to my mind it is similar to P2P lending, but you get an illiquid asset as collateral. It all comes down to due diligence, and appetite for risk, but it is good to know that it is a valid investment scheme.

dunstonh

It's very MSE to scoff at anything new and regard it as a scam and that is graphically illustrated in this thread.

There will be some genuine models that work in any area. However, hotel rooms are rife with scams and bad options. Especially with off-plan and new builds.

The biggest problem is that they market them using terms that appeal to naive savers. Not investors. Savers who believe that the use of the word "guaranteed" means the same as it would in financial services where guaranteed means guaranteed. Unlike hotel rooms or other unregulated areas where guaranteed means only if the company is still there to meet the guarantee.

There have even been some investment funds that have tried the hotel rooms lark and have fallen flat on their face.

It is good that it isn't a complete scam - to my mind it is similar to P2P lending,

Its not even close to P2P. P2P is being regulated. Its a bit dodgy in some areas and needs improving fast but hotel rooms are not regulated at all. They are a commercial activity.

but it is good to know that it is a valid investment scheme.

It is not an investment scheme. It is a commercial venture.

Anthorn

dunstonh wrote: »

There will be some genuine models that work in any area. However, hotel rooms are rife with scams and bad options. Especially with off-plan and new builds.

The biggest problem is that they market them using terms that appeal to naive savers. Not investors. Savers who believe that the use of the word "guaranteed" means the same as it would in financial services where guaranteed means guaranteed. Unlike hotel rooms or other unregulated areas where guaranteed means only if the company is still there to meet the guarantee.

There have even been some investment funds that have tried the hotel rooms lark and have fallen flat on their face.



Its not even close to P2P. P2P is being regulated. Its a bit dodgy in some areas and needs improving fast but hotel rooms are not regulated at all. They are a commercial activity.



It is not an investment scheme. It is a commercial venture.

How very pedantic: Do you have any links to support what you say?

dunstonh

Anthorn wrote: »

How very pedantic: Do you have any links to support what you say?

Please do tell what you think is pedantic about correcting someone who is making a mistake in their understanding of a very high risk area?

I have been called many things by scammers and dodgy individuals. I said people should not invest in Arch Cru before it went on to fail. I was threatened by the Rockingham directors because of my comments about their products before they went on to fail (and action taken against them). Cartel and Kerobo both threatened me and the board before both of them went on to fail leaving debts of millions of pounds.

I have a very good understanding of risks. So, rather than you saying silly things like that, try giving us some sensible comments and allow us to discuss those.

bigadaj

Anthorn wrote: »

That's interesting; Do you have a link to that information?

But as far as I can see Galliard Homes referred to in the article is still going and doing very nicely with rooms for sale in several locations:
http://www.galliardhomes.com/

Did you actually read the article?

But I didn't say it is a reliable investment. In fact the article I linked to says it's a strangest form of property investment and it's a waste of time me filling up my post with the same appraisal.

Lastly, if you have read my previous posts you will know that I already own two static caravans in Cap D'Agde which I own along similar lines to the hotel rooms in this thread. I do very nicely with it thank you very much. That's not to say that I will similarly do well with it in the future: Investments can go down as well as up and I accept that. So unlike you, I actually know what I'm talking about.

You have quoted a nine year old article from the daily mail. One of the two main companies quoted went bust less than six months later, the other went bust the following year. It would appear that investors got pennies back in the pound.

Galliard are mainly a property developer and don't appear to have done anything further in the hotel sphere, at least on an room by room basis.

I don't have a problem with you spending your money on what you like, just don't state that these are good investments. They may or may not be scams, but they are very high risk and unsuitable for all but the highest risk investors.

I'm not sure what owning and letting a couple of caravans has in terms of relevance in putting money into hotel room letting, which is analogous to timeshare in many ways.

Anthorn

dunstonh wrote: »

Please do tell what you think is pedantic about correcting someone who is making a mistake in their understanding of a very high risk area?

I have been called many things by scammers and dodgy individuals. I said people should not invest in Arch Cru before it went on to fail. I was threatened by the Rockingham directors because of my comments about their products before they went on to fail (and action taken against them). Cartel and Kerobo both threatened me and the board before both of them went on to fail leaving debts of millions of pounds.

I have a very good understanding of risks. So, rather than you saying silly things like that, try giving us some sensible comments and allow us to discuss those.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedant

Quite frankly if you cannot substantiate your claims then I have to assume at the least that you are mistaken and what you say doesn't exist and is not true being a product of your own imagination.

Anthorn

bigadaj wrote: »

I'm not sure what owning and letting a couple of caravans has in terms of relevance in putting money into hotel room letting, which is analogous to timeshare in many ways.

Your post doesn't really deserve a reply. But I'll humour you.

Yet more pedantry!

How many ways? List them!

With a time share we are renting the property for a set number of weeks per year but we don't own the property. We can rent out our own weeks if that is allowed in the contract but not the rest because those weeks are owned by someone else. But we own the hotel room and have it to ourselves for a number of nights per year and earn money from lettings over the rest of the year. So the only similarity to a timeshare is that we get to stay in it for a set time during the year.

Similarly I own two static caravans which is operated in exactly the same way as the hotel rooms described above and in the article I linked to.

Why shouldn't I link to an article which provides an accurate description of something if that aids understanding. Maybe I should stop reading Max Weber and Karl Marx too and stop quoting them on the grounds that their books are old ROFL.

Aretnap

Rough business model for a widget investment scam. It matters not whether the widgets are parking spaces, hotel rooms, storage pods or anything else yo can think of.

(1) Buy a job lot of widgets for £10000 each
(2) Sell them to suckers investors for £20000 each. Guarantee a 10% return for the first 2 years, and to buy them back for £20000 after 5 years
(3) Pay each investor £4000 over 2 years - you still have a clear profit of £6000 per widget, and the investors will enthusiastically tell people what good returns they're getting, helping you sell the remaining widgets
(4) After 2 years the investors returns drop to the actual rental yield of the widgets - certainly less than 10% and possibly close to zero
(5) use various legal and semi-legal means to siphon the remaining£6000/widget out of the company
(6) put the company into liquidation after 4 years and 11 months - just as the first investors are about to ask for their money back. Their guarantees are worthless once the company that offered them no longer exists.

It is of course possible to imagine legitimate, albeit risky, schemes which from the outside would look vaguely similar to this model. But They would not tend to promise improbably high "guaranteed" returns and "guaranteed" buybacks designed to create the illusion that the investment was risk-free - even a legitimate one could not be risk free. The dubious guarantees are always a huge red flag.

bigadaj

Anthorn wrote: »

Your post doesn't really deserve a reply. But I'll humour you.

Yet more pedantry!

How many ways? List them!

With a time share we are renting the property for a set number of weeks per year but we don't own the property. We can rent out our own weeks if that is allowed in the contract but not the rest because those weeks are owned by someone else. But we own the hotel room and have it to ourselves for a number of nights per year and earn money from lettings over the rest of the year. So the only similarity to a timeshare is that we get to stay in it for a set time during the year.

Similarly I own two static caravans which is operated in exactly the same way as the hotel rooms described above and in the article I linked to.

Why shouldn't I link to an article which provides an accurate description of something if that aids understanding. Maybe I should stop reading Max Weber and Karl Marx too and stop quoting them on the grounds that their books are old ROFL.

Because that article isn't accurate, it describes speculation on an untried investment which subsequently failed.

Your economic theory is no doubt based in Marx we can but assume?