14 big landlords used software to collude on rent prices, DC lawsuit says

I work in this industry. The biggest problem with the software is it gave the management companies instant access to everyone else’s current prices. The industry has used “market surveys” for years but you had to actually call around and gather those prices yourself. It’s a very time consuming process so many only did their surveys sporadically.

With the software you had instant access to current price data and everyone pretty much raised their prices to match the market average. Then the newer/fancier properties saw the new higher average and thought “We’re a better property so we can raise our prices above the competition.” Which then led to a higher average that the rest then met again. Rinse and repeat and you have a de facto price fixing cartel.

This is why 'competition lowers prices' is a load of bullshit.

Ya'll ever seen Walgreens and CVS? Same prices, right next to each other.

What about 2 gas station on opposite sides of the street, charging the exact same price for their fuel?

It's a gentleman's agreement at best, and a cartel at worst. Either way, no business is going to start an 'undercut war' because they don't want their opponents to do the same thing.

Here's another fine example: Nvidia and AMD. AMD releases worse GPUs, then just piggybacks off of Nvidia's ridiculous prices.

It's all a game to funnel as much money as possible to as few people as possible.
- competition only lowers prices if supply isn't limited sadly. And due to how the housing system works, that would virtually never happen.
- A duopoly is not a competitive market. It's only when you have lots of suppliers and lots of purchasers that a market is actually competitive.
- While true, there are some markets where these properties are fighting for a very finite supply of tenants. If they see they are lagging behind in their leasing, they really don’t have any other choice than to lower their prices to make sure they don’t have any vacant units. The industry term is called “vacancy loss” and it’s the one thing the upper management money men actually fear. A unit without someone inside it is literally bleeding money from them so they’ll do nearly anything to fill it.
  
  Hopefully soon they won’t be able to share their prices as easily and they’ll have to fight for their lives by lowering prices to fill vacancies before another property snaps them up.
- "It’s a gentleman’s agreement at best, and a cartel at worst. Either way, no business is going to start an ‘undercut war’ because they don’t want their opponents to do the same thing."
  
  Play any MMO and you'll see the fallout from that. When it doesn't actually matter in the real world and people go do that everything plummets in value to near 0 and makes it not even worth your time to attempt even in a damn video game. They'll never drop prices to compete in reality because of that reality.

Now as punishment, reset rent prices back a few years.

This is the true affirmative action.
- Reparations not affirmative action.
The 2020 Revenge Tour will continue until ~~morale improves~~ we decide we're done bleeding the plebs dry.

Why do we have landlord monopolies

my landlord owns 1400 properties. it's fucking insane.
- There's companies that own over 100k single family homes, while regularly circle jerking each other on linked in about how "they are dedicated to provided affordable housing to those in need"

And are rent prices actually going to come down?

Survey: nope!

I thought basically every landlord now uses some software to make sure they charge “market prices” even though their properties are trash.

Sounds like you're saying every landlord should be taken out the back and beaten.
- That's a weird way to spell guillotine

God, I want to become a mayor or governor or something so I can push a rule through that says only 5% of single-family properties in any jurisdiction are allowed to be rentals, and landlords have to purchase what amounts to "tokens" from the city that are priced inverse proportionally to the ratio of tenant income to rent to be able to keep the rental. Also, wage discrimination is not allowed. If a potential tenant comes forward with proof, the landleech has to prove that they did not discriminate or they will not be allowed to purchase tokens the next year.

Idk, something. Some limitations on the number that any individual can hold in a city and punish them for overcharging.

I've seriously been considering checking out what it would take to build homes and just make a company that only builds starter homes that can't be sold to corporations. Fuck this system running out of control... Rent through the roof and no housing for the poor/lower middle class....

I absofuckinglutley do not in the slightest bit care about being rich, if the company could survive and support a "normal" life for me that would be more than enough.

It's absolutely absurd that we allow the market to run rampant like this and just shrug it off. "Housing crisis? I don't see one, we're selling large houses like hot cakes! Most well over asking price!"
- So something like a for (ethical) profit Habitat for Humanity? I have had a similar fantasy, start companies in each of the major problem sectors that operate openly and honestly only slightly above solvency and offer quality at good prices just to drive the greedy fucks out of business, then I just stay there. I don't take advantage of the monopoly, I just live as I have been. I envision putting the actual material and labor cost of each product on the packaging in plain English. Kinda like a dietary and ingredients info table for a television. Don't put in spyware, don't put in random hidden cameras behind a screen, don't take permissions on devices so I can listen in on people. Do a bank that micro-lends at a 1% markup from the interest rates on my savings accounts. Make everything repairable and put a wiring schematic on the inside of the case if it is a large enough unit. Etc. You know, be ethical in the way I treat my employees and customers. I know, radical concept. I guess that is just the effect of having a math degree, I'm used to radical concepts.
No renting at all? Why buy a home then? You’re just setting yourself up to become trapped in a bad situation. If you don’t have the flexibility to rent out your property when you get a new job somewhere else, or lose your job and can’t cover the mortgage, then you’ll either be foreclosed on or forced to sell possibly at a loss. Remember, when you buy a property, you are immediately under water due to selling costs of 6-8% of the property’s value.

Let’s picture this scenario:

You buy a house for $300,000

You lose your job a month later and cannot afford the mortgage. Your options are:

sell your house, which will cost $24,000 in selling costs (seller/buyer agent fees), and since your property was bought only a month ago, you don’t have any equity and would have to sell at a loss. Since you lost your job, you have no more money to lose.

wait for the bank foreclose on you

try to hang on to the property by renting it out until you can get back on your feet

If renting isn’t an option, this rule would create a lot of problems for people. The solution isn’t to regulate what people do with their own property more, but to build more housing supply. Your idea would disincentive building housing because it can’t be rented unless you’re in that special 5%.

Edit: Guaranteed everyone downvoting me has never owned a property and has not a clue what the stakes are.

Humans are cannibals.