Episode summary
It was the Fourth of July, so we did the on-brand thing and asked an un-realtor-like question: is homeownership still part of the American Dream? And if you actually run the numbers right now — renting often wins.
Dave and I lay out the rent-vs-buy math honestly, even the parts that don't help us sell houses. Renting is roughly 37% cheaper per month across the top 100 metros at today's ~6% rates. The break-even that used to be five-to-seven years has stretched to about ten. And the famous "owners have ~40× the net worth of renters" stat mostly evaporates if you're disciplined enough to invest the monthly difference — which most people aren't. So the honest case for buying isn't the spreadsheet; it's stability, roots, a sense of place, and the freedom to garden, store a kayak, and actually live in the dirt you own.
We also get into the stuff that quietly wrecks the math: 9–10% transaction costs that eat your equity, why 6% isn't the historical outlier (sub-3% was), how the 2018–2023 appreciation run spoiled everyone's expectations, and the lock-in regret hangover from the 2021–22 frenzy. Then we rethink the "dream home" itself — away from square footage and toward the home that best enables your actual life (the mega-mansion study where people live on one 2,000-sq-ft floor is the tell). The throughline, and the reason our paycheck makes this a hard thing for most agents to say out loud: the real trap is rushing. If you're not confident you'll stay ~10 years, renting a little longer is often the smarter move — and we'll tell you that even when it costs us the deal.
Before all that, Nick recaps his trip to the Zillow / MRED / Compass hearing in Chicago — including a surprise hour-and-a-half Fourth-of-July call from Compass CEO Robert Refkin.
Hosted by Nick Aufenkamp and Dave Miller of The Tartan Team, brokered by Real Broker, LLC. Serving Clark County and Southwest Washington.
In this episode
- [00:23] Nick's trip to the Zillow / MRED hearing — and a call from Compass's CEO
- [02:51] Is homeownership still part of the American Dream?
- [05:36] The data fight: why the "average first-time buyer is 40" headline is contested
- [08:35] What it now takes to buy a median home — about $141k in income
- [10:38] Why renting is roughly 37% cheaper per month right now
- [12:18] The counterpoint: owners' net worth vs. renters'
- [13:40] The real break-even math — and why it moved from 5–7 to ~10 years
- [14:40] Homeownership as a "forced savings account" — and the catch
- [17:37] The non-financial case: stability, roots, and a sense of place
- [22:51] Planting roots vs. how fickle people actually are
- [25:57] Transaction costs: why 9–10% quietly eats your equity
- [27:25] Why 6% isn't the historical outlier — sub-3% was
- [30:31] Rethinking the "dream home" — lifestyle over square footage
- [33:33] The mega-mansion study: bigger isn't better
- [40:14] The lock-in trap and buyer's regret from the 2021–22 frenzy
- [43:21] The real trap is rushing — and how we actually advise clients
Links from this episode
- Episode 4 — Why We Charge a Flat Fee to Buy but a Percentage to Sell — the previous episode
- Realtor Gone Rogue — Nick's Substack, including his coverage of the Zillow / MRED lawsuit
- Book a free consultation
Transcript
Lightly edited for readability.
Nick (00:00): Hey everybody, welcome back to Disclosures with Nick and Dave. I'm Nick Aufenkamp, and joining me as always is my wonderful co-host, Dave Miller.
Dave (00:03): Wonderful to be with you, as always, Nick. You're fresh back from Chicago, covering the MRED / Zillow lawsuit.
Nick (00:23): Yes — and that's exactly what this podcast is going to be about. We're just going to take the next four hours to dive deep into all the particulars of MRED's case and Zillow's case.
Dave (00:35): Sounds highly applicable to everyone who's listening. No — but I bring it up to mention that if you're interested, run over to Realtor Gone Rogue, Nick's Substack, and check out the latest news on that. It doesn't have an immediate effect on our local market, but it may in the future.
Nick (00:59): It was a fantastic experience. This podcast, sponsored by realtorgonerogue.substack.com. The sponsorship pay is garbage, but we encourage all listeners to go check it out.
Dave (01:10): I'm still on the back-end bookkeeping, waiting to see that advertisement payment come in.
Nick (01:21): Keep waiting, brother. The one surprise I'll say that came out of that trip: the hearing was Wednesday and Thursday. Friday morning I woke up to a text from Robert Refkin, the CEO of Compass, asking if we could get on a phone call before I published. So I spent about an hour and a half with him on the morning of the Fourth of July. It was good, but — because I've been very critical of Compass — it did feel a little bit like a "hey, I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed."
Dave (01:51): Just a little disappointed. But man — to have Robert Refkin, who's shaking the industry up, probably the most powerful guy in residential real estate, with 340-some-thousand agents under him — to get an hour and a half of his time...
Nick (02:21): I'll take it.
Dave (02:22): Felt worth the trip, huh?
Nick (02:24): Yeah. And the Zillow people are great, everyone was kind — but I called you from the airport like, "Get me out of the Midwest." So hot and muggy.
Dave (02:35): It reminds me of home.
Nick (02:40): More stuff coming down the pike for that lawsuit, and on the Substack.
Dave (02:50): Super glad you were able to make it out there. What are we talking about today?
Nick (02:51): I was just going to ask you the same question — you took it right out of my mouth. Okay, so it was the Fourth of July. Hopefully everyone had a great time. The Fourth ties into all things America and the American Dream — and homeownership and the American Dream have typically always been tied very closely together. So we thought it'd be interesting this episode to dive into the state of homeownership as part of the American Dream, and really ask the question: is homeownership still the dream? There are a number of things connected to this. One, there's data showing what's changed in the demographics of homeownership — who's buying homes, the age of first-time buyers. There's also the rent-versus-buy question, which feels as relevant as ever. And when we talk about the dream of homeownership, we also start to talk about people's dream homes — and I think the way a "dream home" gets defined is also changing. So we want to hit those, with the goal of helping you think through: is homeownership still the dream for me? And if you own a home, what does the next home look like — how has your idea of a dream home shifted? Anything you'd add there?
Dave (04:27): No, I'd just say it's going to be a bit of a loose conclusion on this podcast. We're going to give our thoughts on some of this data. And it's worth mentioning that there's so much data involved in this discussion — it very much feels like a "whoever's presenting their set of facts" situation. If whoever's presenting has an axe to grind, or an incentive to be had, primarily monetary, the data gets presented in different ways.
Nick (04:56): You say soft conclusion, but we are realtors — so of course the conclusion is: no matter who you are, no matter what stage of life you're in, you should have the dream of buying a home, right? Is that what we agreed on?
Dave (05:08): No — I guess I was planning on coming on here to tell them, "Forget about it."
Nick (05:15): Okay, good. This is a partnership made in heaven. Well — and for anybody who didn't catch that, that was a joke — we're going to have a fair-minded approach to all of this. The soft conclusion Dave's talking about is just that there's no one-size-fits-all answer. So let's start with the data: what's changed in the demographics of first-time home buying, and who's buying homes?
Dave (05:47): Some of the studies we're looking at bring primarily NAR data — that's the National Association of Realtors. All the local agents and MLSs pool their data and produce year-end reports, and that's where a lot of these conclusions are drawn from. And to already start the hedging: different industries — like the MBA, the Mortgage Brokers Association — have some qualms with NAR's data. But NAR, out of the 2025 data set, so as recent as it gets, claims the average age of the first-time home buyer has gone up to 40 years old, which supposedly is up from — historically — closer to late twenties, early thirties.
Nick (06:36): And I remember when that headline came out around February — it was just this eye-popping "40 years old is the average age for a first-time home buyer." That seemed so crazy. A ton of people jumped on it as, "This is a crisis. What's happening to the American Dream?" You alluded to the fact that the Mortgage Brokers Association has some different numbers.
Dave (07:06): Yeah, they're claiming — and you're going to have to remind me how they drew the conclusion — but their claim is it's much closer to 32 or 33 for the average first-time buyer. And that was based on a difference in how NAR was calculating the data, correct?
Nick (07:32): Right. With the MBA — the mortgage brokers — they're only looking at loan applications and actual mortgages that have been issued. NAR's data set is larger because they're looking at cash buyers and all sales. Again, most first-time buyers are probably getting a mortgage. But one thing I thought was interesting across both studies: the first-time buyer is, on average, getting a gift — usually from a family member — of about $32,000 to help with their first home purchase.
Dave (08:35): And both studies agree that the income needed to buy a median home has never been higher. To buy a median home nationally, you need a household income of about $141,000 — and most people hear that, especially if you're in your late twenties or early thirties and haven't hit peak earning years, and it's like, "Yeah, that feels a long way off."
Nick (09:21): So NAR says the average income needed to own the median home is $141,000 a year. As you said, that seems pretty unattainable. I don't think I've ever made $141,000 a year.
Dave (09:32): Back in the Midwest, most of my buddies my age aren't close to that — making over $100k would be considered a pretty high earner back in the Twin Cities. Out here, do we actually know what the median income in Clark County is?
Nick (09:44): That's a great question. I think median income is still around $76,000, $77,000 a year — somebody's going to fact-check me on that — but for dual-income families it's usually closer to $130k, $140k. That gets closer to the median number.
Dave (10:13): So it's safe to say the data is pointing to renting being the better option. That's not something you're likely to hear from every real estate agent, is it?
Nick (10:25): No. It's a great question, because especially in the financial times we're in, with interest rates being what they are — there was a study that found that, from a monthly cost standpoint, in the top 100 metros across the U.S. (and honestly, Vancouver, Washington didn't make the top 100, but Portland did), it was cheaper — significantly cheaper — monthly to rent. Like 37% less expensive every month to rent rather than own. And that's because with 6% interest rates, the cost to borrow money is just so high.
Dave (11:20): And we've seen this even on a few of the homes we have listed for sale. Even if somebody was coming in with a 20% down payment on a $500,000 or $550,000 home, their mortgage is still going to be around $2,600, $2,700 a month, when renting that same home might be closer to $2,100, $2,200 a month. So for many people, if you're just looking at your monthly cash flow, renting is a clear winner. Which raises the question: if renting is so much more affordable, why would anybody buy a house right now?
Nick (12:08): Well, everybody's probably heard some version of the statistic that the net worth of a person who owns the place they live, versus rents, is significantly higher. I think the number we came up with was something close to 40 times. The median net worth of an individual who owns was around $430,000 versus — what was it, about $10,000 for a renter. So a pretty significant difference.
Dave (12:56): So if you're looking at that — and everybody's heard some version of it — the thought process is, "Okay, owning a home is the better long-term choice." So it sounds like we're maybe talking out of two sides of our mouths: renting is in fact cheaper currently than owning, and yet there's a lot of data indicating owning your home is the best long-term wealth generator somebody can have.
Nick (13:21): I think there are two different planes we can look at for why that's the case. On one hand, there's a break-even point. When rates were closer to 4 or 5%, it used to be that if you were in a home about five to seven years, that was your break-even — after that period, with conservative market appreciation plus the way mortgages amortize (so you're paying more principal than interest), that's when you start generating wealth faster by buying rather than renting. Unfortunately, higher rates have pushed that time horizon out. Now you really need to own for closer to 10 years at a 6% interest rate for that break-even. And we'll flag this to come back to, but there's a question mark of how many people are staying in their home 10-plus years these days. So that's one factor — you've got to be in your house longer. The second factor is that owning a home is sort of a forced savings account for a lot of people. In theory it's, "Well, I could buy a home for $2,600, $2,700 a month, or I could rent an almost identical home for $2,100 a month."
Dave (15:09): And somebody really financially savvy might take that extra five or six hundred dollars of difference and invest it. If you were that disciplined — taking the money you're saving by renting and investing it in a 401(k) or ETFs — you'd probably see similar wealth generation to that homeowner. You wouldn't, 10 years later, have just $10,000 invested — you'd probably be in the multiple hundreds of thousands. Most people just aren't that disciplined, though.
Nick (15:39): Right.
Dave (15:41): So to say it more succinctly — always more succinctly, I'll try — hypothetically, if you invested the difference saved from having lower rent than the cost to own, and you invested it in what's considered the... "guaranteed" is a bit of a misnomer, but the average return of the stock market over a long period — high sevens into the 8% range is what's considered the annual return — people who are investment gurus calculate all these exact numbers, and they find that in most cases, renting is actually, from an exact-numbers perspective, more profitable long-term than purchasing a home.
Nick (16:37): And that doesn't end up changing until maybe 10 years — is that what you're saying? So then, what are the actual reasons you'd purchase a house?
Dave (17:06): This is where it comes down to each individual, but it transitions us into this question of "What is the dream home?" Because yes, there are financial aspects to homeownership, and over a long time horizon it can be a fantastic investment. But most people buying a home don't think of it primarily as an investment vehicle. They think of it as something essential to their lifestyle.
Nick (17:37): And — maybe it's a bit romantic — but the idea of owning the dirt you live on ties into our American heritage, especially out here in the West, being settled by pioneers years and years ago. There's that aspect. There are also the unpredictabilities of renting: your rent can go up every year, the landlord could decide to sell, you're much more limited in what you can do to the home. Even my wife — a big-time gardener — I know that if we were renting, she'd always feel like, "How much do I really want to invest in gardening, setting up irrigation and beds, on a place we could be forced out of in a year's time?" So there are a lot of lifestyle, emotional elements where it's just, "I want to own a home."
Dave (18:52): So it sounds like you're saying one of the major upsides is the stability that owning your own home brings. You have less chance of being undercut — kicked out, forced out. We're selling a house now that was an investment property; it didn't make sense for the owner anymore, so they said, "Okay, we're going to sell." Fortunately, he had a good relationship with his tenants, so there were no hard feelings. But sometimes those can be really difficult situations — if you've been renting from the same landlord for years and then they decide they've had enough of real estate investment, you've got to go find somewhere else. That's one real danger. And I think you're right on that owning a home gives you a lot of options renting doesn't. It's interesting too — and I'm venturing a guess here — a lot of these statistics are skewed by mass multi-unit rental getting mixed in with people renting single-family homes. You have to calculate in your mind and assume that. And that's where I'm staying currently, having just gotten out to the Pacific Northwest — we can't own a kayak or a boat, bike storage is hard. So all these other things, you start looking at the numbers.
Nick (20:57): On paper, renting is cheaper — but then hypothetically you have to be very disciplined and invest that money. And the numbers NAR and these other associations put forth aren't necessarily going to reflect all the additional costs of living the lifestyle you want while renting. If you need somewhere to store anything related to your hobbies, or even if you just have more stuff...
Dave (21:26): Right — and that's a great point. Storage is something we should cover on a whole other podcast. But to sum up my thought: there's a lot of hidden cost, both monetarily and more so in terms of the threat to your lifestyle and your stability, in renting.
Nick (21:57): And I think there's a real sense of place that homeownership gives you, whereas renting has this inherent transience — or at least potential for transience. When you own a home, you're literally and metaphorically much more invested in the community. You're far more aware of what your property taxes are, and because you're paying those, you have more vested interest in what's going on with community projects, the local schools, anything related to your local community. I think that's something a lot of homeowners really lean into and appreciate.
Dave (22:51): But it does come back to that time-horizon piece — when you're buying a home, you really have to have the mentality that you're planting roots. And as we talked about, at least in the current interest-rate environment, for it to make sense financially it needs to be a 10-year-plus horizon. And as we were saying even before we recorded — when people start shopping for their dream home, it's really easy to get caught up in the idea that "I'm going to be there forever." But reality doesn't always break that way. You had some thoughts on that — I'd be curious to draw them out.
Nick (23:20): It seems, in my experience, that people get really wrapped up in the emotions, the romanticizing of "I'm going to be here." And so they pour a lot of money and time and effort into getting exactly what they want. And human nature seems pretty fickle. I can remember having clients back in Minneapolis who built beautiful multi-million-dollar houses and were like, "Nope, this is it, this is where we're going to stay." And then a couple of years later they're talking to me like, "Yeah, we want to get a few things ready — we're selling the house and moving one city over." And it was like, "Wow — you did so many things." That's maybe a specific example of somebody who spent a very high amount for a large custom home with the exact finishes they wanted, paid a premium, under the guise that "this is where we'll be forever," and then within a couple of years they're already gone.
Dave (24:44): I think, to draw the harder line we're pulling at — and even more so out here, with the excise tax and the cost to buy and sell a house — if you're a young professional, maybe new to a city, maybe you moved to Clark County for a job and you don't necessarily have a ton of family here, you've got good friends but you're not sure you're going to stay: my recommendation would be not to buy.
Nick (25:28): From what we hopefully laid out clearly, renting from a numbers perspective makes way more sense. So unless you're planning on staying for the long haul, it doesn't make sense. We even know some clients right now who bought houses, and the margin for what they're leaving with is very, very thin once you factor in all the cost of selling. And that's something not reflected well in a lot of these data sets: if you invest that money into stocks and you need it, you can lay your hands on it pretty quickly — it's easily liquidated. Whereas if you invest all your money in a house and your dream job comes up, now you've got to figure out how to sell that quickly.
Dave (26:27): And there's not much more dangerous for your bottom line than being a highly motivated seller — somebody who has to get out. I think the underappreciated thing when you're thinking about buying is what the transaction costs truly are. You think, "If I put $50,000 down, when it comes time to sell, no matter what, I've at least got $50,000 in equity to pull back out." Well, the transaction costs can be 9 to 10% once you've got real estate commissions, title and escrow fees, the excise tax, and a handful of prepping-to-sell costs. That can eat up your $50,000 real fast. And to actually have your home appreciate $50,000 usually doesn't happen over a couple of years — certainly not in the current housing market.
Nick (27:27): And I think that's what skewed things for some people — they bought their first house in 2018 or 2019 and saw this historical outlier where home appreciation went through the roof over the four or five years from 2019 to 2023. And they're like, "I did so well, let's do it again."
Dave (27:53): And that goes back to the fickle nature of it — you can only draw on your own experience. If you got into the housing market post-2015, when rates were headed to their all-time low, in the sub-threes — maybe I'll get fact-checked; I think in the 1950s they were close to 4% — but in general, 6% for an interest rate is not an outlier. So there's a surprise people have if their first data point was a 3% mortgage rate, and now 6% feels like this unbelievable, crushing burden — when historically it's actually not an outlier.
Nick (28:41): Right. And I think you're right about both the frustration people feel about the cost of housing, because rates went up — but I could make an argument that they actually stabilized. And also the sales side: a lot of people who bought in 2022 haven't appreciated at all. In certain areas in the county, they're still flat. That might not be true if you bought in a very highly desirable population center — some large cities in California — but here, it's not necessarily a foregone conclusion like it may have been from 2015 on.
Dave (29:11): And I do hear some listeners who might bristle at "Okay, rates may have stabilized, but back in the 1950s you could buy a house with two quarters and a stick of gum." A classic retort — not exactly the case today. So there's still a legitimate conversation to be had: typically, when interest rates go up, that's when we see home prices depress.
Nick (29:41): You mentioned in Clark County things have more or less stayed flat — we haven't seen major depreciation in prices. That's a whole other conversation for another time. But as we wrap this one — let's get into: what is the dream home? Because at least for me, growing up, the dream home always had to do with the amenities, the square footage, the number of bedrooms and bathrooms, how much land, this very picturesque, gorgeous home I'd be proud to show off. But I think for our family — and for a lot of folks — the idea of a dream home has actually shifted. Because in chasing the traditional dream home that has everything you could ever want, it also comes with a price tag that can kill every other dream you have in life — the classic "becoming house poor." And especially with affordability being what it is, and wage-growth stagnation, people are starting to think, "The dream home is the home that actually best enables my dream lifestyle." What does that trigger for you?
Dave (31:37): My mind went back to renting for a second — how many more options of things you can have or do if you own your own home. There's a significant increase in what you can do and the stability you have in life. And it seems to me people overshoot quite a bit — we always think we need more than we actually do. That's maybe a baseline of the human condition: "Why buy the 500-horsepower sports car when you could get the 700-horsepower car?" — for that one time a year you go to the drag strip and beat the other guy down the line.
Nick (32:34): That's right. "The 72-inch flat screen would be fine, but there's a 96-inch that's just $150 more, and wouldn't that be..." And we're being a little comical about it, but that's been an attitude — maybe a caricature, but definitely an attitude — of the American consumer: "Let's just get as much as we can for as cheap as possible." And I think you're right that the cultural air has started to shift toward, "Well, do we really need a 4,000-square-foot house if we're only planning on having two kids?"
Dave (33:17): There are lots of studies of how people use their houses. It's a very interesting — maybe not immediately applicable — study, but there's research into mega-mansions, into very well-off people buying houses. I'll pick a number, since I'm not sure exactly how the article classified it — say 6,000 square feet. I don't know how many people listening have walked a 6,000-square-foot house, but it is impressive; you can wow your friends. The reality is a lot of these people live on one floor of a three-floor house, because one floor of a 6,000-square-foot house may only be 2,000 square feet — and that's really what a lot of the studies show as a comfortable amount of space for the average-sized American family. So the conclusion I've drawn — when I was building my own house back in Minneapolis — was, this doesn't need to be huge. This is actually a personal interest of mine: designing a better home, where larger doesn't necessarily mean better in terms of how the home lives and what it gives you. I'm of the opinion people would be a lot happier if they got something of better quality that there was maybe less of. So when you're thinking about square footage — which is usually a direct tie to price — my general push is: don't buy right at the top end of your budget. Buy something a little smaller that you really love, that fits your exact needs, and look for quality over quantity. That's a personal ethos, but it plays well with Tartan's ethos — we're not here to push you into the most expensive house. To sum it up: buy what's really important, not more.
Nick (36:00): I think that's right. One of the wonderful things about being alive in 2026, and some of the ways our cultural moment is going, is really thinking more critically about what makes you happy — as opposed to what society deems success, or "having made it." And another point on the 4,000-square-foot house: if you could be just as happy in 2,500 square feet, it's not just the upfront cost — it's all the other costs. If your flooring wears out, or you want to change your flooring, the cost to do that in a 2,500 versus a 4,000-square-foot home; the cost of painting your walls; the cost — not just monetarily but time-wise — of landscaping, how you want to spend your weekends, what kind of staff you might have to hire. All of those are factors that need to be carefully considered when defining your dream home.
Nick (37:09): And I go back to the thought: for somebody who wants to own a home, but it's, "Okay, I like this community, but I might have a job change in the next three or four years — I'd like to get on the housing ladder. Does it make sense to buy?" Maybe the dream home is actually a home you live in for a couple of years and then it becomes a phenomenal rental. Of course we'd look at all the numbers to see if it could cash flow, run projections on appreciation. But there are so many angles to look at: does buying even make sense, and if it does, what's actually the best home — not just the best home you could dream of, but the best home that supports your holistic lifestyle, day to day and long term? Whether that means renting for another five years or looking for a home today — those are the conversations we absolutely love having.
Dave (38:38): It seems to me — no, it is the case, and as we talk about a lot on the podcast — that when your paycheck is tied to closing the sale of a house, it's hard for agents to say that. To say, "Buy the smaller house," or "Don't buy if now's not the right time," or "Unless you're 100% certain you want to do this, it probably makes more sense to rent." Those are hard conversations to have when they work against your own bottom line. And we're in an interesting time where people in our generation and the generations behind us are starting to reject the stereotypical American consumerist idea of "just have more, just buy more, make it a show — 'look at what I got.'" Maybe touch for a second on the regret you've seen in some people who've bought.
Nick (40:19): Well, there was the whole frenzy, right? 2021, 2022, interest rates super low, so competitive to buy that many people were like, "I just need to get something." So they bought a home that was way too big, or way too small, or not in the right neighborhood. And then, as interest rates went way up, they've had this lock-in effect: "Okay, this house doesn't serve my lifestyle, but I'm stuck now, because I don't have enough equity to sell, and as soon as I try to buy something else, because of the interest rate, my monthly mortgage is going to be twice as high." So they bought into this panic and frenzy, and — to your point about thinking they'd be somewhere forever — because it was frenzied, because they didn't ask some of these hard questions, now they feel stuck in a place they hate coming home to, that creates unnecessary stress. That's the very situation we want to help people avoid. Yes, we exist to help people buy and sell homes, but it matters to us that it's not just any home — it's the right home.
Dave (41:43): And it's funny — I've had several conversations over the past few years where I've recommended, "Hey, you should consider renting for another year or two." I had that conversation with a guy just a few weeks ago — he wanted to sell, and it's like, "Man, your interest rate is good. I know it's tight, but if you can hang tight, this is probably the best situation for you." And almost every time I have that conversation, folks come back and say, "Yeah, I thought about what you said, and I still want to move forward." At that point it's, "Hey — now that I know you've carefully considered it, let's go." Whatever it is you want to do. We're not here to tell you what to do, but we're here to make sure no assumption goes untested — far be it from us for you to come back in a couple of years like, "Frickin' Dave, I sure wish I'd bought before prices went up even more." Once again, it's hard to land specifically in one place — for every upside to renting there's a downside, and the same for buying.
Nick (43:21): I think the real trap is rushing into purchasing a home. The frenzy, the emotion behind it — "Oh my gosh, I've got to get this right now or it's gone forever" — that's dangerous, and it leads people into bad situations. Going back to the math: if appreciation isn't as good as it's been — if you've got 2018-to-2023 appreciation in your mind, and the reality is closer to what we've seen between 2023 and now — a lot of people aren't going to make any money. In some cases there are people trying to sell who've changed their mind — this house they dreamed about wasn't what they wanted, and now they're actually underwater and have to bring money to sell. That's the worst-case scenario, but it has happened, because appreciation has flattened out.
Nick (44:42): So those are the things you need to really think through when you bring your preconceived notion of, "Hey, my buddy bought a house in 2018, sold it, made out like a bandit, multiple offers, it all went great." There is inherent financial risk in buying a house if you end up needing to sell it again within five or six years. If I could land it with my personal conclusion: don't rush into buying a house, and be certain you want to stay — both in the larger context of the state or region, and the more specific context of what city you're in.
Dave (45:26): And even if you're maybe thirty minutes from where your life is every day — we have sellers where that made the decision for them; it drove them to want to sell and get to a place closer to where they are. Gas isn't free, and neither is your time. So don't rush in.
Nick (45:56): Yeah, I think that's a great place to leave it. Listeners, if you have questions, or things we haven't considered, or thoughts you want to contribute, leave those in the comments. And of course you can always have a conversation with us just by going to thetartanteam.com/book — we'd love to chat about your unique situation, talk through any of these questions, and help you determine the best next steps.
Dave (46:20): Please do subscribe to the show, share this with somebody you think is thinking through buying a home, and we look forward to catching you in the next one.
Nick (46:28): See ya.