The Neighborhood's goal is not to acquire and then flip houses. We want to hold them for at least as long as the natural life of a coliving house. If it's possible to maintain a great community indefinitely, we'd ideally hold them indefinitely, too.
Here are two strategies I endorse:
1. [[The Omar Morales strategy - buy all-cash, return capital, co-own cash flowing property forever]]. This is preferable if I can find investors with a 10+ year investing horizon.
2. [[Develop coliving, exit to cohousing]]. This is the pitch for investors that need a shorter hold period.
3. [[Promote crystallization]]. A third route to a permanent hold, worth considering if I raise from LPs: rather than forgoing the promote (Omar Morales) or selling to pay it out (exit to cohousing), the GP's promote is *crystallized* into a permanent co-ownership stake at stabilization — keeping operators aligned on holding forever.
The structures trade off return against control of the asset. Illustrative figures from `Models/realestate.py` on a comparable value-add deal:
| Structure | LP [[Internal rate of return (IRR)|IRR]] | LP capital returned | GP keeps |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sell at stabilization | ~17% | 100% (but the asset is gone) | a promote |
| Cash-out refi + hold ([[Pari-passu\|pari-passu]]) | ~9.5% | ~70% | no promote |
| All-cash, return capital (Omar Morales) | ~10% | 100% | 10% of a hold-forever asset |
| Promote crystallization | ~11% | 0% (recovered via cash flow) | a ~8% perpetual stake |
Selling wins on IRR but loses the house; the hold strategies trade IRR for keeping it. ([[Leverage amplifies returns and risk symmetrically\|Leverage]] and [[Multiple on invested capital (MoIC)\|MoIC]] shift these too.)
There is also this strategy, which is unlikely to work in San Francisco is the near future:
1. [[In 2024, the Moses Kagan strategy doesn't pencil]]
If you have feedback or ideas, please email me at [
[email protected]](mailto:
[email protected])!