Jen Higham is an real estate speculator and for some entitled reason seems to believe real estate, particularly speculative rentals is some sort of guaranteed return. Are we supposed to feel sorry for her?
We don't feel sorry for and we don't give a platform to folks who lost their shirt speculating on equities or cryptocurrency. Is she somehow different? She made a bad investment play because she's not as smart as she believes she is. Boo hoo.
I don't get why Jen Higham thinks "Oh, we'd have to sell the properties" is an unintended consequence and not totally fine, considering it's mentioned multiple times in the Citizen article.
Like, sure, they sell them, presumably to someone who *is* willing to manage a long-term rental, or to someone looking to buy a home to live in. The only "downside" is that she doesn't own it anymore, but when the conversation is about allocating housing for people to live in, it doesn't really matter to us if she owns it or not.
Also, again, just blatant misrepresentations of fact in defense of AirBnBs. I checked both AirBnB and Google maps (for hotels), and prices are pretty comparable (With some hotels actually coming in *cheaper* that the cheaper STR), not "Much cheaper". That was true when AirBnB was new in the early 2010s, but it hasn't been the case for years. People just say things like this and nobody checks!!
"We have at least three companies that come in and provide travel nurses and we will lose all of them, they will stop bringing the nurses here because it’s just not affordable for them to bring them in and put them in hotels,”
um, that isn't how government contracts work, given that I am assuming these companies are under contract to Ministry of Health/NHA. Sign a contract, then you must provide services as per the agreement. Those companies are making a profit, those nurses are being paid well, and all on our tax dollars because that is the model, for better or for worse.
"It's just not affordable to them" = "not as profitable to them"
Further point on Jen Higham's 8 properties where she is saving PG's healthcare situation. She's certainly not running a not-for-profit from the goodness of her heart.
She's turning a profit. She's banking on the properties increasing in value while others pay her mortgage(s) in a market where a lot of first time home buyers are having a hard time getting their foot in the door.
"Not interested in running long-term rentals"
Because it doesn't generate the same revenue. It has nothing to do with the "trouble" of it. You can't say you're a good business woman on call 24/7 to host these airbnbs. Coordinating the cleaning, check-in/check-out of 8 properties and simultaneously complain long-term tenants are too much work.
Council should stop their fight because of people like her, not fight because of her.
Jen Higham is an real estate speculator and for some entitled reason seems to believe real estate, particularly speculative rentals is some sort of guaranteed return. Are we supposed to feel sorry for her?
We don't feel sorry for and we don't give a platform to folks who lost their shirt speculating on equities or cryptocurrency. Is she somehow different? She made a bad investment play because she's not as smart as she believes she is. Boo hoo.
I don't get why Jen Higham thinks "Oh, we'd have to sell the properties" is an unintended consequence and not totally fine, considering it's mentioned multiple times in the Citizen article.
Like, sure, they sell them, presumably to someone who *is* willing to manage a long-term rental, or to someone looking to buy a home to live in. The only "downside" is that she doesn't own it anymore, but when the conversation is about allocating housing for people to live in, it doesn't really matter to us if she owns it or not.
Also, again, just blatant misrepresentations of fact in defense of AirBnBs. I checked both AirBnB and Google maps (for hotels), and prices are pretty comparable (With some hotels actually coming in *cheaper* that the cheaper STR), not "Much cheaper". That was true when AirBnB was new in the early 2010s, but it hasn't been the case for years. People just say things like this and nobody checks!!
lmao, Jen Higham. "I bought 8 properties in 4 years but I also need this income to feed my family, and I also rescue SPCA animals so I'm a hero"
My god, the self entitlement and lack awareness is astounding.
this quote
"We have at least three companies that come in and provide travel nurses and we will lose all of them, they will stop bringing the nurses here because it’s just not affordable for them to bring them in and put them in hotels,”
um, that isn't how government contracts work, given that I am assuming these companies are under contract to Ministry of Health/NHA. Sign a contract, then you must provide services as per the agreement. Those companies are making a profit, those nurses are being paid well, and all on our tax dollars because that is the model, for better or for worse.
"It's just not affordable to them" = "not as profitable to them"
Good grief, Jen.
Further point on Jen Higham's 8 properties where she is saving PG's healthcare situation. She's certainly not running a not-for-profit from the goodness of her heart.
She's turning a profit. She's banking on the properties increasing in value while others pay her mortgage(s) in a market where a lot of first time home buyers are having a hard time getting their foot in the door.
"Not interested in running long-term rentals"
Because it doesn't generate the same revenue. It has nothing to do with the "trouble" of it. You can't say you're a good business woman on call 24/7 to host these airbnbs. Coordinating the cleaning, check-in/check-out of 8 properties and simultaneously complain long-term tenants are too much work.
Council should stop their fight because of people like her, not fight because of her.