630
Why all the landlord hate? (thelemmy.club)
submitted 2 months ago by [B] to c/funny@sh.itjust.works
62 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 2 months ago (7 children)

I don't understand the difference between a renters coop and a regular apartment.

Fair enough. For five percent, I'll haggle with all the bureaucracy necessary.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (6 children)

    A regular apartment the owner gets the rent and then decides how to spend it (maybe on the apartment, maybe the mortgage of the building, maybe on a new sports car for themselves). In a renters coop the tenants pay "themselves" and they decide how to use the money. How much should they allocate for gardening, repairpeople, new buildings etc. It gets cheaper and cheaper at scale too. There usually is some democratic decision making-process involved where the tenants decide.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (5 children)

    Who owns the units?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (4 children)

    The tenants through whatever governing body that they chose. In lieu of a deposit there is a buy-in that gets you a membership in that body. This buy-in gets returned with an appreciated value if the tenant choses to move somewhere outside the renters coop.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    How is that different from buying an apartment?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    Because you don't have to buy an apartment. You don't have to pay anything close to the full value of the apartment up front to live in it. You pay something akin to a deposit, and you are sure to get it back with appreciated value if you move out. You don't have the hassle of buying and then selling associated with it. If you leave the co-op you get the portion of the co-op you own paid out and that's it.

    The important distinction is that the apartments are paid for by the rent other tenants have paid, that accumulated and is then used for construction. That means the buy-in of a new member is not tied to the market value of the apartment at all, but rather what the co-op values it membership at.

    The co-op has an incentive to increase the membership fees because doing so increases the value of all memberships. So if someone decides to leave the co-op they get more than what they paid in, making it a pretty good investment. Theoretically it's capped at demand for memberships, but afaik this has never been an issue.

    Furthermore the co-op can offer these apartments however they wish, they aren't bound to a profit motive. They have the option to be more lenient or offer financial assistant to those who can't afford the buy-in. And growing the co-op is usually desirable because it makes a lot of services cheaper like not having to contract out gardening work but employing the gardeners itself.

    I hope that makes sense, my family needs me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    So how is that different from a no cost EMI? Also, off topic but your last sentence hilariously sounds like you're a mine worker.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Lol yeah, I hadn't proofread my comment to my satisfaction when my kids started crying and I desperately wanted to at least read it once in full length but my wifes glares kept getting stronger and stronger so I just bailed lol

    On EMI, it is a very different thing indeed. At the end of an EMI you own the home personally. With a renters co-op all the renters own and manage all the properties collectively as soon as they become members. Well kind of. A renters co-op might get very large, at which point an elected governing body becomes necessary. Any renter is eligible to vote in these elections, no matter how long they've been renting, and representatives are literally from the neighborhood so it's possible to just talk to them while out walking the dog or whatever. This governing body (however incorporated, usually as an association i think) owns all the properties, some engaged renters put themselves up for election and people vote on it. This governing body then oversees the budget and weighs what to put all the incoming rent toward.

    But no matter how long you have lived there, how much rent you paid, you personally don't own any part of any property. If you move to another residence within the co-op you just move there. No selling or buying, your rent might get adjusted but that's it. If you move out of the co-op you get the portion of the co-op that you own paid out. You can think of it a bit like a share in a company. You own a portion of the company, the share is valued at whatever fraction you own times the value of the company. You can decide on the direction of the company by voting with other shareholders. The parallels end however when you get to trading shares, you can't trade membership in a co-op. Every renter is expected to own a "share" (with maybe some rare exceptions) and every "shareholder" is expected to have a residence in the co-op. It's therefore not possible to trade your share. Either you're a renter in which case you have to have one, or you aren't in which case you cannot have one. Meaning you can't speculate on them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent