Buying vs Renting Doesn't Make Sense
One of our readers has done research on "Asking Rents" of homes located in the 90402 zip code of Santa Monica. Not surprising, the cost of buying a home is about double, plus the risk and opportunity cost of a 20% down payment. When properties are appreciating, buying "might" make sense. But in today's environment, where home prices are declining, or remaining flat at best, it is a losing proposition. Below, are some current asking rents on houses in 90402:
1616 San Vicente $5500 3+2
415 14th St $5000 3+1
340 21st Pl $4500 3+1
728 26th St $4950 3+2.75
316 20th St $4500 3+1
1064 Harvard $5900 3+2
1101 Harvard $4900 3+2
328 18th St $6300 3+2.75
Let's use 340 21st Pl as an example. The location of this home is excellent and it is situated on a large lot. If the home were to sell for say $2,000,000, the mortgage payment, taxes and insurance, after 20% down, would be well over $9000 per month, or twice the asking rent. This equation works for most homes for sale on the Westside. Here is a simple calculator to do your own analysis if you know comparable asking rents and asking sale prices of the house your interested in. Mortgage Calculator Do your own homework and don't be fooled by the real estate sales hype.
It would be interesting to see the difference in mortgage payments vs rent payments on the above houses. If anyone is familiar with possible selling prices of the above homes, let us know the relative cost of buying, versus renting them.
Posts
51 comments:
It's pretty simple math and as you point out, you do way better renting. Also, home owner's insurance + flood/fire/earthquake insurance + etc. insurance + property tax + maintenance is far more expensive than renter's insurance.
I looked up the 340 21st Pl address at: http://assessor.lacounty.gov/extranet/Datamaps/Pais.aspx
According to that, it was sold for $1,810,018 on 9/29/2009. So mortgage payments are probably significantly more than rent if we assume they have a standard 20% down mortgage and didn't pay in all cash. If they did pay in all cash, the rent is actually better than the savings accounts rates ;) 4500*12 / 1.8M = 3%. Even taking into account property taxes, it comes out to 2%, still better than savings.
So that's the only hypothetical scenario I can think of for this particular case that makes some sort of sense.
The better than savings calculation doesn't work. The reason is that at some point, interest rates absolutely have to rise(they can't get any lower). So at some point, the savings account(and most definitely other types of investments) will pay more. That brings up the illiquidity problem of real estate and this whole transaction just doesn't make any sense.
Even scarier is when one considers what happens when somebody goes ahead and buys despite this glaring unbalance, and then has to rent out their property...at a loss. I've seen this happen a few times already in my building in WeHo...imagine paying $625K for a two bed condo that you can only rent out for $2400 a month -- the choice being between that and short-selling or walking away. It's death by a thousand paper cuts vs. taking a quick slice to the throat.
I agree completely.
By the way, where can I find the complete list of houses in the 90402 that are for rent? I look at realtor.com and only see some houses for rent, not all of these.
My wife and I just purchased after looking for 9 months.
I think there is a fallacy in this line of reasoning. That the rents being seen today are here to stay and not just a reflection of a glut of rental properties due to sellers waiting until the market recovers.
Comparing the cost of one year leases to the cost of a mortgage amortized over 30 years is really comparing apples to oranges.
If you think in a 1 year time frame you'll be a renter forever (and poorer for it even with no significant appreciation in housing prices.)
The real opportunity is that the market is down AND 30 year fixed mortgages are at near historic lows. Jumbo mortgages as of today 4/12 are around 5.5% and all of the interest is tax deductible for loans up to $1.1 (and I'm assuming most people in 90402 itemize and are in the 33-35% tax bracket)
So let's assume the mortgage on a $1.8 million house is $1.1 and the buyer puts down $700K.
At 5.5% the payment is $6245, taxes add $1875 per month for a total of $8120 per month. Certainly a lot of money. But let's consider the tax deduction (around $2000 per month since all the mortgage payments for the first few years are interest.) Now the total outlay is $6120 per month for the first few years.
Now apply the rate of inflation (ave 3.5%) to that rent and within 10 years it equals the purchase costs. In years 10-30 the rent escalates significantly (but the housing cost is locked at the same cost.). Try the calculations yourself.
http://realestate.yahoo.com/calculators/rent_vs_own.html
Nice 9:11...sounds good...but you are wasting your breath...you are on a fence sitter blog here....
A lot of readers will flame 9:11, someone who does their homework and makes a rational choice that work for them. The Westside R/E blogs are getting to be complete debbie downers... the other shoe is going to drop...just wait for the next collapse of the economy.... massive foreclosure wave coming... shadow inventory ballooning out of control..
Get a grip, the market is more alive than dead.
"A lot of readers will flame 9:11, someone who does their homework and makes a rational choice that work for them. The Westside R/E blogs are getting to be complete debbie downers... the other shoe is going to drop...just wait for the next collapse of the economy.... massive foreclosure wave coming... shadow inventory ballooning out of control.."
Its a selection issue more than anything. We always had permabears on this board, but they were tempered by a very large number of moderates who actually would pull the triger.
Over the last 1.5 years, they have been pulling the trigger, whereupon they have no need for this blog and quit posting. Thus all you have left now is alot of permabears who will never ever buy. They were priced out forever and just dont know it or wont accept it yet.
Its sad really - all the once glorious bubble blogs are going belly up. I wish I was still stateside and had an opportunity to buy. As I dont, I am left with trying to get info on this market from a bunch of malcontents.
Re Anonymous at 9:11.
Yes, the interest tax deduction is nice. But assuming that rents will go up 3.5% per year is a huge assumption. The point of the list of asking rents was that they seem to be going down--I compiled it in order to have some evidence for our current landlord. We want to pay less once our first year is up. The other major assumption is that you will never need to sell the house, and are unconcerned with the price it might fetch 5 years down the line.
If you are comparing Buying vs Renting, you have to add in the investment returns on the money you didn't put down for a down payment, and the monthly payment savings.
So, what will $700k do in terms of investment over 30 years? what will the $40k(?)/ year do (owning monthly cost - rent) for at least the next 5 years?
If you take a look at historical stock market returns, including the latest collapse, 7% isn't crazy. your down payment is worth $5.4 million in 30 years! If rents "catch up with the mortgage" in 20 years (3.5% increase doubles in 20 years not 10, and most people with $1MM in investments have other tax offsets to replace the mortgage deduction. Also add in no repair/maintenance costs)add in another $2M million or so.
I'm not saying you made a bad choice in buying, but the full truth of your comparison isn't fully fleshed out.
Add in cash flow constraints, and the possibility of a further decline in home prices, (yesterday's numbers show foreclosures/delinquencies at an all-time high)and I don't think your argument is very strong.
NOW, if you love your new home, have no fears of making the $8k monthly payment EVER, and have another $200k in savings, then ENJOY! you bought a HOME, not an investment, Nobody should EVER criticize your decision in buying a HOME.
Great homes do not always equate to great investments.
This blog isn't about permabears or permabulls. Many of us could and will buy, some of us for cash, but only when it is rational. This blog is about discussing when the decision to buy would be rational. Right now there are too many negative indicators and cold hard facts, such as actual YOY declines in the Westside, demonstrating that a current buying decision isn't rational.
The example above with the $700k down just isn't credible. What is missing from the calculation, and those that see things the way they really are see this, is that a good portion of the $700k will be lost. So the rational thing to do would be to wait until the market levels off and then buy. Again, we are discussing here whether we think the market has leveled off or is continuing to decline.
Anon -- April 12, 2010 9:11 PM
How about running ALL the numbers on the New York Times rent vs. own calculator, and providing all of your assumptions/inputs. Let us know how that works. If you show rents and housing prices increasing with the same rate of inflation, that would be logical (thought neither is guaranteed to go up or down at the rates we predict).
Also, you do have to include the use of the "extra" $700,000 of down payment as an investment over time and give your assumption as to its long term rate of growth. I dare say it needs to exceed the inflation rate you assume in order to be taken seriously.
Make sure you go into the ADVANCED settings, where you can account for your rent deposit with the landlord, the rate of return on investments, the income tax rates you face, the inflation rate, etc.
What you will find is that a move from a 5% rate of return on investments to a 7% rate of return on investments makes a HUGE difference in the results in the case you suggested with the big down payment. Then, you may wish to show a superjumbo loan at 6.75% and a 30% down (what is happening now, minimum). Try it!!
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/business/buy-rent-calculator.html
the NYT calculator includes the following items (among others) left out by the yahoo calculator:
1. purchasing costs (appraisals, loan points, closing fees, inspections, etc.)
2. selling costs (you don't get the money at the end of the 30 years unless you sell -- so, how much is that 6% to the RE brokers again?
3. Landlord deposits by renters
At the end of the day, once you run the different numbers, you see what drives the rent/buy deal: assumed increase in the value of housing with a leveraged loan. If housing goes up a lot, buyers win. If housing does not go up a lot, renters win. If you have to have a big deposit and have high interest rates, renting looks better.
Permabears are feisty today...
April 13, 2010 11:27 AM
not permabears -- number crunchers -- we rely on NUMBERS -- do you have any to share, or just opinions?
April 13, 2010 8:04 AM
"So, what will $700k do in terms of investment over 30 years? what will the $40k(?)/ year do (owning monthly cost - rent) for at least the next 5 years?"
Real numbers:
I sold my condo in 2002, invested 50K in a handful of stocks. Call it talent or just dumb luck, but even with the crash last year, that 50K is up to 670K.
It's possible that I would have been further ahead if I'd bought a place and flipped it, but I think I'll sit on that money until housing prices match incomes. I'm sure that I'm not alone.
'This blog isn't about permabears or permabulls. Many of us could and will buy, some of us for cash, but only when it is rational.'
When has it ever been a 'rational' decision to buy in one of the highest priced markets in the country (per sq. ft.)?????
I bought in Sunset Park for $237 a square foot way back when. EVERYONE thought I was insane (even our mortgage broker). Now its $700/sq. ft. in 90405.
Call yourselves what you are....FENCE SITTERS and NAYSAYERS. Enjoy sitting on all that cash in your drafty apartment with the neighbors kids banging on your shared wall.
Anyone who is rational is out looking at property.....and pulling the trigger.
Actually, I rent a really nice supposedly 2.5M house. And I'm sitting on substantially more than $700k.
"not permabears -- number crunchers -- we rely on NUMBERS -- do you have any to share, or just opinions?"
Not really - im here to simply snark and laugh at all of you who have been priced out forever, but dont know it yet - running your pet metric assuming it will make sense when it hasnt in decades. Thank you for the continuous entertainment over the last year or so.
Got popcorn?
Ha! 1:58pm...so true...
Notice how they are all sitting on $1,000,000,000,000 and rent the cheapest place (but its worth a lot)...but still can't commit....
Hmmm, even Warren Buffett owns a house, people.
Losers...smell the bubble waft by you.....
The last 2 bloggers are perfect examples of brainless people conditioned to believe that you are less than if you don't own a house. They are mindless idiots wandering through life like robots, never thinking for themselves. Just taking on the beliefs that society feeds them. What a couple of goofballs.
There are still some non-permabears here that are sitting on the fence. My wife and I make $350k/year and have that same amount in cash and another $350k in investments. We are looking to buy a house around $1 million and are very content waiting to see what happens when interest rates go up this year and next.
"They are mindless idiots wandering through life like robots, never thinking for themselves. Just taking on the beliefs that society feeds them."
Try it this way: the 'idiots' are knocking down big bucks doing something 'smart' people are buying. The 'idiots' are able to provide a comfortable lifestyle for their family, including home ownership. Maybe the 'smart' money folks think they will inherit the earth, but the 'idiots' will enjoy it along the way. Call me an 'idiot', but I am posting this from my wonderful house, and could care less about pinchy comments from the peanut gallery. Good luck to you all.
I posted the comment yesterday at 9:11 that got the emotions all amped up.
There have been some good comments here and helpful resources pointed out. The interactive NY Times calculator is really great. Thanks for the thoughtful post BlahBlahBlah. The calculator shows pretty clearly that small changes in stock market returns, rent inflation and the future prices in westside real estate determine the outcome.
My comments are based on my observations looking for a house on the Westside over the past 9 months. At first I had the "I have cash and I'm in control, going to get a house for 1995 prices" mentality. And for awhile the market was stuck -- nothing was selling. We made a bunch of offers "reflecting market reality" in Brentwood, Westwood and Santa Monica. But sellers weren't biting. They'd reject the offers and sit. Even with no other offers.
If their house didn't sell then they'd compromise by renting (usually at exorbitant prices) Now there is a bit of glut and rentals are getting more competitive but I think that is just a blip because houses seem to be selling again -- not like during the bubble but selling within a month or two.
So I can't see the future but if all that predicting the market took was an internet connection, a desire to pay very little, and a copy of Excel. We'd all be rich.
Here's what motivated me to buy:
- Prices have dropped substantially already on the Westside
- Mortgage rates (even for Jumbos) are lower than I can remember for 30 year fixed rates. This can't last
- Banks are lending again to qualified buyers without much hassle
- The economy is recovering and confidence is returning.
It feels like the pendulum which swung hard to negative last year is settling in the middle.
IMHO Better to buy once the market thaws a little with little competition than wait to find the bottom (if you even can) then have to deal with multiple offers and higher interest rates when the government decides to stop subsidizing mortgage rates. Then you'll curse yourself for missing the opportunity and be unwilling to step up (or overpay for the house or the mortgage).
If you have been seriously in the market you would be seeing the same thing I do. But you can't see it from the web you have to be out there making offers and insulting agents.
I'm not trying to insult anyone just sharing what I saw and to me it feels like it's turned (and this is my 5th home in the last 20 years.) Perhaps it will help one of you.
Maybe I'm wrong and the floor will drop out of the Westside market and if so I'll have a fixed payment in a great house (and 30 years for things to swing back) Or maybe I'll rent it to one of you :)
A fence sitter converts to reality...he is a buyer! Rejoice!
by the way, and i know many of you will call this another "fence-sitter" making excuses, but i am in the market now. But i am just taking it as any other investment and am looking for value.
I put a bid in on a home in SunPark a few weeks ago. Home on market for $1MM. 200+ dom. $700/square foot. old. needed work. I bid 10% below asking price. Broker told me that the seller didn't want to counter. Thinks he can get asking.
20% down payment, pre-approval, legit bid, and NO COUNTER OFFER.
Similar situations, no counter or unrealistic counter, have happened 3 times in 60 days to us. None of our bids were below 12% of asking. None of the homes have sold.
Anecdotal opinion now, but when sellers are unrealistic like this, we got room for this market to fall. The biggest mistake an investor in ANYTHING cane make is saying "this time its different". It never is.
Blahblahblah....love sunset park....lotsa crappy little homes, but there are some out there with decent upsides too.
Keep looking. Its where the new upper middle class are moving to....
When a crappy little house is $1M+, you know the market is wrong. This is so very obvious to those that aren't making the buying decision based on emotion.
There are Volkswagen collectors that think a 1974 bug is worth $25,000, but to most it's just worth $1,500 as a transportation car. The housing market is changing from this overpriced emotional collector type market to a normal market, where buying makes sense given incomes and rents. Be rational and wait, or be emotional and lose your downpayment.
We are experiencing the same thing w/ sellers having some idea that they can get whatever price they list their house at, irrespective of all the other nearby homes sitting on the market, and the squawking and screaming about how you can't compare "MY house" (which is a fixer) to "that foreclosure down the street/next door/etc." Echoing some of the comments here, we are aware we are probably going to get fleeced even if we buy at actual market prices today-- but sellers are clinging to the belief that they can sell at 05/06 prices. We had a seller in what I call "fake Bel Air" (90077, on Linda Flora) actually e-mail us a packet, stating their intention "not to be taken advantage of" with an accompanying Zillow chart showing that, on average (leaving out "the less nice parts of Bel Air") home prices went up by 20% from 2005-2009, so since they bought for 1.4 in 2005, their house is actually worth 1.7, but they are so kind as to be willing to sell at 1.4. They neglected to mention their house was worth 849k when sold in 2004 and then flipped for 100% gain a year later. They wouldn't sell to us at $150/sqft more than true non-distressed comps. Unfortunately, with a house (unlike most assets) you only need one crazy buyer (sucker)... meanwhile, interest rates are rising. If you want to know why housing prices are going down, it's because people like my family, currently making about $375k/yr w/no debt and no kids can't afford to live in upper-middle class neighborhoods WITH a 250k down payment... now that banks are paying attention to DTI and not making jumbo loans above 75% LTV, there's no fool to push most of the inventory on to in anywhere other than the nicest areas of LA... unfortunately, too many people think they can price their 1500sqft house as if it's one of the nice houses in the nicest parts of LA.
We think houses have a long way to go, but we are still willing to buy if we can find somewhere we like that isn't more than 1.5x comparable rent AFTER tax deductions. :0 (Incidentally, those are the houses that ARE selling and they are moving quickly, which tells me we are still mid-bubble.... however, the bubble may never fully deflate).
That's a good story. I'm in about the same place you are w/r/t income and debt, and I've got my down plus, but I'm single. I would like to get into a place but I can't see spending $1M+ for what is being offered in today's market. For that much I expect a lot more house. I agree it might be a while, but the market will be rational again one of these days. I'll think about it then. In the meantime, I will enjoy the conversation here about how the correction is happening.
Nice to see that all the rational people are being smart and choosing logic over emotions when it comes to investment and home buying. Seems like the real estate cheer leaders here are the only ones getting hot tempered by all these comments. I am sure the ones screaming that their house is better than the REO are also the ones screaming here you will be priced out bull! Buyers unite. Screw these seller, sooner or later, we'll buy their houses from the bank at a real discount. BTW did anyone read this:
"Foreclosures started off the first quarter with modest gains but spiked in March to a record 367,000 filings. Plus, nearly 258,000 of those filings were for bank repossessions, the highest quarterly total RealtyTrac has ever reported."
Blah...blahblah, Santa monica is different... don't make me laugh.
Yep, saw that. I say thank goodness. Let the property go to responsible buyers. I like to go to foreclosurestogo.com to look at the statistics by area code. They have another type of shadow inventory, it's called "bankruptcy". You need to add in these folks when looking at prices and supply. I've been watching the trends of NOD, bankruptcy, etc. over the past couple of years and the uptick is substantial (like tripled or more). One of these days, likely in the next year or two, sellers are going to wake up to reality. Of course, there has already been some downward adjustment, but not nearly enough to where one would say the market in normal.
Bubble logic and bubble emotions die hard; you can read that in all the "I have a house and you don't" posts. Their brains were so conditioned by the bubble that they just can't let go of the idea that the bubble will resume tomorrow. It's essentially the gambler's fallacy -- their thinking has been distorted by a statistically improbable event. Realtors also suffer from the same delusion.
Here's a factoid for you: in the last three housing downturns, home prices bottomed about 37 months (plus or minus a few) after the peak in unemployment. That's not speculation, that's history. Think it's going to be different this time? You better have a really, really good reason, because people who say "it's different this time" have a historically really lousy track-record.
Yeti. That's a very telling stat. Is that a national stat or specific to Los Angeles or the Westside? Can you provide a link to the data?
That IS a very telling stat. You know what, its so telling I am going to call bullshit on that one.
So im calling your bluff anon@3:48 pm. Please provide a link to the data. My guess is you cant because you made it up, or you will come back with a response like "I heard it on another site" or some other such nonsense. 37 months is simply very hard to believe.
Excuse me that should be Better Yeti@3:48
Anyone see the 10 year bond after the SEC charges against Goldman? Down 16% -- so much for a rise in mortgage rates!!!
Prices will only fall so far in desirable areas. Places like Santa Monica aren't simply pulling from the local work force, and therefore they are not bound by local incomes. People from across the country and worldwide desire to live in certain areas, and you will be competing with them for the same real estate.
You're not just fighting with the Jones, you're fighting worldwide. Your "piddly" $350k salaries to take out jumbo loans will always fail. There is always a bigger fish, and they want the nicer houses. And they have the cold cash to buy it outright.
If you want the emotional house experience then go get it - you can get the ownership in other zip codes besides 90210. Unless you want more than a house.
Status does not come cheap.
Actually, Better_yeti is "Kind of Right", but not exactly. Home prices tend to start to recover about 3 years after unemployment peaks. (see this chart. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_3bGnkNeoPxk/Sj5xEw4Q5oI/AAAAAAAACmU/Ndo8xkAigaY/s1600-h/RealHousePricesUnemploymentRate.jpg
anon 9;39, consider your "bullshit" call called. do YOUR homework next time)
Now, we also have a chart somewhere, (i am re-looking for it now) that shows that high-end real estate bottoms about 12-18 months after the overall real estate market bottoms.
So, to put it simply, if you use history as a guide, the high end real estate market ain't going up for 3 years, and probably is going down a little more. (but i owe you a chart for the 'probably down' part
"consider your "bullshit" call called. do YOUR homework next time)"
Actually, no. That is the exact same CR graph I was thinking of when Ready Yeti made his claim.
I figured that is bullshit since, as CR noted:
"In the early '80s, real house prices declined until the unemployment rate peaked, and then increased sluggishly for a few years. Following the late 1980s housing bubble, real house prices declined for several years after the unemployment rate peaked."
http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/search/label/House%20Prices
So, for the record, there was ONE instance where prices simultaneously bottomed with the unemployment peak, and ANOTHER where prices declined for "years thereafter" (nothing about 37 months but whatever).
So, Ready Yettis claim:
"in the last three housing downturns, home prices bottomed about 37 months (plus or minus a few) after the peak in unemployment."
Is BUUUUUUUULLLLLLLLLSHIIIIIITTTT. Probably the reason he never came back to prove it after I called him out. Typical.
I agree 100%.
Look, if you make less than $500k you just don't belong North of Montana.
I mean it is pathetic.
Everyone on this blog acts like the only choices are North of Montana or Palmdale.
The alternatives to North of Montana are ok. You will be fine. Just throw in the towel on North of Montana and choose something realistic.
Stop crying and begging and pleading for North of Montana. It isn't going to happen. Get on with your life somewhere else
I totally agree. All of these analyses are nothing more than wishful thinking wrapped in a delusion that they can outsmart the market by analyzing market data from the whole country or all of Los Angeles.
They're waiting for a rational market to occur in one of the most sought after areas in the world. The market will never be rational because there will always be a wealthy buyer willing to step up. Unless you can compete with irrational folks rolling in silly wads of cash you'll never get in.
But I've been studying the historical frequency of large temblors in Southern California and I'm buying an entire neighborhood in Riverside county (soon to be beachfront.)
Prices will fall. Really really hard. But some here still won't be able to buy in the 90402.
Why don't they give it up and stop torturing themselves
The dream is over.
Settle. Get on with your lives.
Prices will fall. Really really hard. But some here still won't be able to buy in the 90402.
Why don't they give it up and stop torturing themselves
The dream is over.
Settle. Get on with your lives.
Just came back to echo that I'm not particularly familiar with Santa Monica-- I've lived my entire life in LA and never found the Santa Monica vibe particularly desirable compared to the Palisades or the nice neighborhoods closer to Century City/Beverly Hills. I'm not weighing in on whether or not the "coveted" part of Santa Monica is reasonable on under 500k a year... but as a tax lawyer who pays attention to California tax practices and increasing State and Federal budget desperation, I think people may be underestimating the effect of tax related flight (especially capital gains) from the upper tiers of the LA market. Sure, there are always a handful of Saudi Princes or celebrities who managed not to blow all of their money-- but the hedge fund managers, people who make money for a living or otherwise act with rationality are not going to be paying huge premiums to live in Taxifornia... which is a negative driver for home prices in the best areas.
Ultimately, I agree with whatever jerk said home prices will never be rational in certain areas-- to a certain extent. There are certainly enough people to populate the very best areas of the westside who can literally afford to send millions down the drain to live in a coveted house.
Peace 2 All
nj Moving Boxes New York
Last Minute Move
Best Moving Deal
Apartment Mover
Atlanta Relocation
California Mover
Local Movers
Moving Shipping
New York Moving Companies
NY Moving
Online Moving Quotes
Overseas Moving
Packing
Picking Professional Movers
Professional Movers
Residential Mover
San Jose Moving Services
Shipping Container
Usa Mover
[url=http://www.amatteroffax.com/itempagey_invid_1526859_d_xerox-xdl-23.html]Xerox XDL-23[/url]
[url=http://www.amatteroffax.com/itempagey_invid_1367002962_d_brother-mfc8480dn-p-c-s-f-laserpr-32ppm-64mb-duplex.html]Brother Brother MFC8480DN[/url]
I feel ethically obliged to update my earlier post-- the crazy zillow chart folks were able to sell their house for less than 10% below asking to some poor borrower, who is already probably 25% underwater.
To get free moving quotes from the best van lines movers in your area please fill out the short form provided here. We will never give your contact details to anyone without your permission, and there is no expense or commitment involved in this offer!
We have helped different types of customers, including government employees and military personnel to find the right moving companies. We have also helped people to find reliable and efficient Moving Company, who are capable of moving their businesses quickly, and with minimum disruption.
Depending on your budget and needs, you can choose to make a self-move, a self service move, or a full-service move. A self move involves doing all the packing, loading, and driving you. It may be the cheapest option, but involves a lot of hard work!
If you are willing to spend a little more, you can opt for a self service mover, which involves packing your things in crates or a trailer, which is dropped at your home by the moving van line.
The van lines movers company will collect the crate or trailer after about three business days, and deliver it to the destination, where you will have about three business days to unpack your possessions.
If you opt for a full service move, which is the most expensive option, you can relax and let the relocation movers do all the packing, loading, driving, and unpacking for you!
We can help you to find local movers, interstate movers, apartment movers, international movers, and more, with a few clicks of the mouse!
Please take a look at the comprehensive moving resources provided on our website, which include practical packing tips and advice, put together by experienced professionals. Please feel free to send us an e-mail if you need any advice or information!
[url=http://aaamoving-store.com/packing_store.php]Moving Company[/url]
[url=http://www.peacemovers.com/articles.php]MOVER[/url]
[url=http://flatratemove4.jimdo.com/2010/02/08/about-nyc-international-movers-moving-flat-rate/]Flat Rate Moving[/url]
[url=http://vanlines1.blog.com/2010/01/24/find-nationwide-vanlines-call-1866-668-3748/]Get Van Lines[/url]
[url=http://movingservice4.typepad.com/blog/2010/01/best-moving-company-new-jersey-amsa-members.html]Moving Services[/url]
[url=http://njmoving2.onsugar.com/7168862]NJ Moving Service[/url]
[url=http://www.peacemovers.com/the_world.html]mover[/url]
Post a Comment