[soupfordummies]

Towards the end of the article is this depressing nugget:

" Nearly one in five homes were purchased by investors in early 2023, including LLCs and other corporate entities, according to data compiled by real-estate firm Redfin of more than 40 of the largest U.S. metro areas. "

[jrk]

Nearly every time single old houses in in-demand areas are bought for renovation or redevelopment into denser duplexes, they're "bought by investors, including LLCs and other corporate entities." This doesn't mean 20% of housing stock is being bought and left fallow or anything – this is exactly how densification and redevelopment in response to demand happens. Many of those LLCs are even individuals.

[riskable]

About a quarter of all single-family homes in the US are owned by investors:

https://www.billtrack50.com/blog/investment-firms-and-home-b...

The percentage of investors that buy single-family homes in a given year may rise or fall but the long-term trend is clear: Investors are owning more and more of the total market over time. Actual single families are being priced out.

Some markets are worse than the national statistic and entire neighborhoods are being bought in order to turn every single home into rentals. The New York Times wrote about this last year:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/23/us/corporate-real-estate-...

It's a very real issue and a few simple changes to the laws in regards to how many single-family homes may be owned by corporations would make a huge impact.

[gowld]

> About a quarter of all single-family homes in the US are owned by investors:

I don't see that mentioned anywhere in the article.

I see "Last year, investor purchases accounted for 22% of American homes sold. This is significantly down from the 80% number in 2020-2021,"

Also, that "80%" number appears to be a mistake that doesn't match the cited source. https://www.redfin.com/news/investor-home-purchases-q3-2021/

It appears to me a misstatemenr of "investor purchasing of single-family homes increased over 80%." which is just silliness comparing the covid dip to the post-covid recovery back to normal.

The billtrack50 article is so incoherent and self-contradictory that it's not worth trying to make sense of it.

[Supermancho]

The implication is that the land is for housing? Notably, Irvine California successfully transitioned from being an Army Base town (very large military blimps, etc) to a thriving city. A jewel of southern california.

[1letterunixname]

"Thriving" if one considers an Orwellian and totalitarian worldview similar to that of Singapore to be a viable and humane philosophy.

[Supermancho]

I have experience with the Irvine Company as well. There were decades where they were not in control of the city. Before Blizzard, before Google.