[Gabriel54]

Now I see the source of confusion. I think $100 from the perspective of a tenant may be quite a lot (as mentioned a 12.5% increase). However as you said my thesis is from a landlord's perspective $100 is insignificant with all things considered. If even one unit were empty for two months, that would be an annual loss greater than the extra money they would make from the previous tenants. Also in our case they already have had a unit empty for over six months now which further baffles me.

[Jensson]

> However as you said my thesis is from a landlord's perspective $100 is insignificant with all things considered

$100 is often way more significant for the landlord than for you, for you it is a $12.5% increase, for the landlord after his expenses it could easily be 100% increase in their profits. The landlord could have a massive loan, and with increasing interest they needs higher rent to pay that, then there isn't much else they can do than increase rent.

[schmidtleonard]

This is why it is important to draw a box around capital interests and analyze them together when considering policy, otherwise the landlord, bank, and previous owner just point at each other and say "the real problem is over there." Or they raise the possibility as a hypothetical, if they know it isn't true in their case.

[bastage]

Thankfully I'm sure the very smart landowner has already considered that and built it into their business plan.

[Jensson]

Why do you expect the landlords to be smarter than anyone else? When things are bad for the landlord things become bad for the tenants, it is only natural, look up the situation of the landlord before you rent if you want to avoid this.

[HeatrayEnjoyer]

Look it up where?

[Jensson]

You can do a credit check on them just like they do on you, if they are a public company you can check even more details in their reports.

[HeatrayEnjoyer]

Again, where? Give us a URL