Real Estate Investing in the Real World
Real Estate Blog
SATURDAY, JANUARY 19, 2008

A reader who goes by the handle “Max” made a comment the other day that got me thinking. There’s a concept in pop business theory called the Peter Principle which states that managers tend to get promoted to their point of incompetence – taking on bigger and bigger responsibilities until they eventually get to the point where they’re over their head. And this, ironically, is the point where they tend to stick.

In discussing the concept of leverage, where an investor builds a profitable portfolio of investment properties over the year by occasionally executing a 1031 exchange, the Peter Principle might be relevant. As Max points out, you don’t want to get in over your head.

There’s something to this. There’s an implicit assumption that over the course of your investment career your ability to manage the complexities of larger properties and a greater number of tenants will increase. Additionally, you will also put yourself in a position to make judicious use of property management services. But at some point an investor needs to know how to say “enough”. Smart investors need to recognize when they’ve gotten to that point.

But often they don’t. And if you can find one who has gotten beyond his comfort level then you may be in a position to negotiate a great purchase. There’s a phenomenon I’ve noted which I call the “two-fer” sale – keep your eyes open for these. From time to time I’ll notice two similar properties which hit the market simultaneously. Sometimes they’re FSBO’s, and you’ll notice them if there are two identical FSBO signs on the same block. In my experience, this is a sure sign of an investor who paid for some expensive Rich Dad type motivational seminar, and in a wave of enthusiasm and empowerment hit the streets and bought the first two houses he could get a mortgage for. Essentially, this investor hit the Peter Principle very early in the game. He wants out.

Two-fer’s can be a great opportunity. If you can find a reluctant landlord who’s struggling with the negative cashflow drain of two vacant properties, you negotiate a great bargain by saying you’ll take both of the properties off his hands: I’ll take ‘em both for $XXX,XXX. And that should be a really low combined price. But the reason that this tactic works is that you’re making the seller’s problem disappear in its entirety. This can make the seller shift into “cut my losses” mode in one fell swoop.

This is a tactic that works. This is how I bought the two properties (FSBOs) a few years ago that I’ve recently vowed to sell as my New Year’s resolution. And on the buy side I’m looking at a couple of similar opportunities as we speak.

So the Peter Principle is a sword that cuts both ways – so make sure you’re on the right side of this trade.

Tags:
Add to:
Add to Technorati Favorites
Add to Digg
Add to del.icio.us
Add to Reddit
Comments(6)
posted by: Chris Smith
Comments
January 23, 2008
11:57 PM
Along with the Peter Principle goes the question, why have managers? (Or at least, why have so many?) Organizations promote good employees who have certain skills up to positions in which they aren't skilled. Why not pay good employees raises in order to keep them in their current positions (where they're successful) rather than force them to seek promotions that don't align with their gifts?
January 24, 2008
08:19 AM
Mel: In my experience working in big organizations this happens for a simple reason - someone has to do the work! So if Joe does a good job in sales then he gets promoted to sales manager. If he does a good job there then he gets the nod to be regional manager. If he does well there then they make him a managing director. And if he struggles at managing director they're unlikely to demote him back go regional manager - they'll tend to keep him in that director job for years and years. Joe has just outrun his own headlights. Or so the theory goes, at least...
January 29, 2008
10:58 PM
Hi Chris: Your posting ["Two-fer..."]has revealed the lens thru which you view the world... OPPORTUNITY! And I say that with admiration! Yes, you are absolutely right - as an investor you need to have potential sellers' psychology, mindset, and local reality firmly on the radar screen. The more "cornered-in" a seller feels, on a deep visceral level, the more tempting your low-ball offer. Because we are intelligent, strategic investors we will profit from the overly eager who bought into the push and desperation for so-called instant wealth. The thing about the Peter Principle is that the Peters rarely, if ever, recognize their own newfound weakness. In a way, this ties into your excellent blog post on the rationale for maximizing leverage by re-investing equity every few years. Someone who has hit the Peter Principle is no longer optimally leveraging his or her own talents and abilities. As strategic investors it is incumbent upon us to recognize our own abilities, particularly as our projects unfold and enlarge over time, as we recognize that the optimal LEVERAGE of both financial and personal resources is our best strategy for future wealth.
February 05, 2008
08:30 PM
Max: Glad you stopped back by - it was your comment that inspired this post. Glad to have you as a reader.
August 15, 2009
01:29 AM
Now that IS an interesting tactic!
November 24, 2009
10:28 PM
sadw
Leave a Comment
Enter Name
Enter Email - will not be published
Enter Website Address
Enter Your Comment
email a friend
print this page
About Me
Chris Smith
Email Sign Up
Enter Your Email Address

Add Email
Delivered by FeedBurner
Archives
My Blog Log