Should I pay cash or finance my next property acquisition?
There seem to be such confusion in the mind of many investors regarding de-leveraging and eliminating debt.
It goes without saying that one of the biggest advantages of doing deals in the US is dealing with banks and getting loans to acquire properties. But many investors argue today that one maybe better off buying properties all cash. I will discuss this issue in this blog hoping to clarify the difference and how to calculate it. Here is a simple example to illustrate the impact on your financial well being both in the short and long term:
Say there are a few properties for sale at one million dollar each. The properties have absolute NNN leases (meaning the Tenants pay all expenses) and each property is producing a 10% cap rate (meaning 10 percent return on capital. In this case $100,000 a year in income for each one million dollar property)
Scenario one:
You pay one million dollar in cash to acquire one of these properties producing a nice $100,000/yr. in income. No debt and no expenses, so you net $100,000/year.
This is again without calculating closing costs, depreciation and other expenses, (because it is an absolute NNN lease). You would be netting 10% cash on cash return and have no cash reserve left.
Now it would also be wise to get a credit line of 50% (that’s the maximum banks are willing to give out nowadays for credit lines against a solid commercial property with good income). This credit line will help as your cash reserve and would also help you access cash quickly in case of last minute opportunities in the market place.
Scenario two:
a) You put a 30% down payment to acquire one of these properties and obtain a loan at 7% interest for 30 years.
Without calculating closing costs, depreciation and other expenses, you would be getting $100,000/yr. income. Your payments would be apx. $56,000/yr. And you would net apx. $44,000/yr. or 14.6% cash on cash and still have $700,000 in cash reserve.
b) Now it would be wiser to acquire two properties in the same way using the leverage and getting a $200,000/yr. income. Payments apx. $112,000/yr. And you would net apx. $88,000/yr. or 14.6% cash on cash return with a $400,000 in cash reserve.
c) What would really be wisest is to acquire three properties in the same way using bigger leverage and getting $300,000/yr. income. Payments apx. $168,000/yr. And you net apx. $132,000/yr. or 14.6% cash on cash return with $100,000 in cash reserve.
So let’s numerate the advantages of having a loan instead of paying cash:
1) Your return is higher based on a on cash invested
2) Your safety margin and peace of mind is enhanced because you would still have some cash reserves to use as you wish
3) Your risk would be spread out over more properties
4) Your growth is exponential over a the same period of time
5) You have more ways to transact (sell one-keep two or sell two and exchange for bigger and better) etc.
This will work if:
1) You have a strong tenant with a corporate guarantee and absolute NNN
2) You have a loan interest rate fixed for 10 years minimum
3) You have a loan interest rate at least 2 points below your cap rate
4) Your bank would require a reasonable down payment (30%) with reasonable terms (interest rate fixed for 10 yrs)
5) You have the willingness, patience and ability to keep the properties for a long term over 10 years and the longer the better in this scenario.
Please understand that if I would have chosen properties with upside potential (such as apartment buildings that you could acquire to improve, or buildings that you could separate to sell or rent as condos or houses you could buy fix up and resell etc.) the impact on returns with a loan would have been extremely more powerful as the cash on cash would have been dramatically magnified.
Instead, I used an example of a simple formula of properties with existing long term NNN leases and strong Tenants to minimize any variables in the calculations and to clarify my point.
And the point is:
The most valuable element in leverage using the bank loans is time value over money. Time becomes your friend three times more in the last example because if the properties double in value (say 30 years later the properties double in value to $2,000, 0000 dollars) in scenario one, your net worth would only be $2,000,000 but in scenario 2 (c) your net worth becomes $6,000,000.
And the best news is the loans got paid off by your Tenants.
This combination is the best illustration of the power of compounding with leverage.
You do the math, slowly, calmly and let the numbers speak for themselves.
The irony of this is most conservative people would argue with you along the way that you are paying a lot of interest, but truly you are netting more every single year for a better life style and you are getting a bigger bang in value at the end of the loans.
To be conservative is okay but to miss such an elementary but powerful advantage in commercial/income producing real estate is a shame.
So is there a time one should pay all cash?
The only time I believe it would make sense to purchase real estate using all cash is if most of these elements exit simultaneously:
1) You are buying the property in a hurry
2) There is huge competition
3) You have no other deals in the short term (or none as good as the one you are acquiring at least)
4) You will not be holding it for a long term (low price in and re-sell fast is the plan)
5) You may get a loan or a credit line after you acquire it
6) You don’t need much in cash reserve (or will still have some cash reserve after your cash purchase)
7) The property brings no income so you want the least expense in holding it (usually temporarily until you reposition it and sell it or rent it then get a loan)
8) The interest rates are way higher than the income generated by the property at this time but you are acquiring it for its upside in the shot term.
9) You simply have no credit to get a loan (and the property produces no or low income but is ready for repositioning).
10) You do not know what else to do with your cash at this time
Whether cash or credit you can’t just have your style dictate what’s right and wrong. Investing is a skill based on numbers. You must do the math and let the numbers show you what makes sense. Buying a property all cash and keeping it for the long term robs you of the additional income and long term value multiplier. Buying all cash makes sense only when very specific circumstances are involved and it is rather a short term transaction.
Realistically, if you are of a short term mentality and the market is competitive and aggressive, you probably will have to move quickly and pay all cash for your acquisitions if the property price is dramatically below market comparable sales, your goal would be to get the property as cheap as possible (and maybe turn around to re-sell them as fast as you can at a higher price if you do not care about the tax consequences). To get such great a deal cash would be king.
Ideally, if you are of a long term mentality, no matter the market you probably will be moving a bit slower looking for properties with long term streams of income that you can acquire with the proper leverage because your goal would be to enjoy, perhaps right away or down the road, the positive cash flow and higher long term value. To get such income producing deals proper leverage against safe income would be king.
That is the power of compounding with leverage over time that very few people truly understand and even fewer people dare to apply.
Sincerely,
Cherif Medawar
ICRE, Founder