>Right. (Insurance, too.) It's very expensive to let a house sit vacant.
I'd argue it's not expensive enough since it's frequently done.
EDIT: This has already become a common issue in locations like NYC, big money parked into properties with many commercial and residential units vacant. Better to pass those fees and borrow against artificially inflated value than it is to realize a loss.
EDIT2: I typo'd and meant to say 'pay', not pass those fees. (as a cost of doing business)
Commenting on Walter's comment below:
> I've sold houses before. I hated every day it was sitting there sucking up money.
I understand, my problems are with institutional/large wealth artificially constraining supply.
> As for artificially inflated values, bank lenders are not stupid and are not going to loan against a phony value.
Do correct me if I'm wrong but is it really their problem if they can sell that risk or the gov bails the whole sector out when there's a panic?
