Topic: acquiring many properties in the name of owning an asset (Read 588 times)

I don't know what goes through the mind of wealthy people for them to do what they do but I'll never know until I'm wealthy too one day and see what they see. From assumptions I'll say they're just flexing their wealth and showing off to their counterpart who is wealthy, just as we showoff between ourselves so do the wealthy too. I heard there are clubs only people that own yatch can attend and this will motivate any wealthy person that wants to attend to party or join the club to buy a yatch and same thing might be for a private jet or island club. Some of them are just trying to avoiding losing their money so they put it in landed property that they can always sell later for money. Others might just be wasteful spending as they didn't plan for their money or they just have too much to hold.


My advice would be to go with fewer assets and not liability, there are properties that we'll own and they become a liability to us. Anything that takes money from us are liability and if a property keep taking money through maintenance other charges then they're a liability but if we own few properties and they're very productive then we're good. Personally I have always believed in productivity over quantity.

That's a very hard question to answer because that approach is very individual and exclusive. I prefer to mix both. I would invest some part of my money into unproductive assets that I think will become very productive soon. For example, imagine that there is an abandoned place and the city is expanding. You'll be able to buy the land on this abandoned place very cheaply and it won't bring profit for a long time but as the city grows, this abandoned place soon becomes surrounded by people and very soon becomes a part of the city. Then who knows, this place might become a very prestigious area. This type of investment can bring you tons of profit after 10 years, 20 years, 30 years.

There is another perception that rich people are targeted when they own building properties but instead leave them dilapidated and destroyed. They don't care about that because what they are targeting is investment with land ownership. If you know that as time goes by, it has a high price to sell. Moreover, the geographical location of the land is very ideal, accessible and reachable. I have often heard this talk from people who deliberately bought and let the building collapse because they were thinking about long-term investment. Not looking for short profits, just using the building.

This will be a big risk for those who are not too wealthy, but will be a negligible risk and worth a try for those with too much money, and here we are talking about people who are able to own a lot of real estate, they are super rich people. And I think it seems inappropriate for us to judge or give advice to rich people about how to spend their money. They are businessmen, they probably own a lot of real estate, which means they are not stupid to not know what they are doing with their money. Furthermore, in business, the failure of 1 or 2 projects is not a big problem because as long as they succeed with the remaining projects, they will regain what they lost before and even earn more profitable.

Maybe they are thinking about doing experimental investment towards those asset to see if it could give something long benefits to them especially that there's a chance for those properties to get its value appreciate.

But this is really a risky investment option to choose since we don't know if some of it will work, knowing that its hard to seek for immediate development of some places especially if their bough asset locates on remote area. And there are certain critical factors that affect its growth.

So for people thinking about doing this maybe they should go on more better options and acquire those assets which can give them assurance that can generate them a profit.

If someone is very wealthy, they can afford to make risky investments and experiment. Yes, perhaps most of those assets will eventually fail, but there might also be one that performs so well that it's all worth it. Another aspect is, of course, diversification. No matter how reliable and stable a market or an asset seems, there is always a risk that some sort of event can cause it to crash. It is important to not put all eggs in one basket, so to speak.
I don't think it's a good idea to own too much property (if we're talking about real estate, cars, and stuff like that). Firstly, their liquidity isn't great. Secondly, it is bad for the environment. Thirdly, it seems unethical to obtain and own so many resources that others could truly benefit from. After all, we have one planet for everyone, and one person doesn't need 20 flats or cars.

Choosing a real estate business location is of course very important because if we choose a location that is not yet developed, of course this requires a long process of waiting so that the business we run can generate profits, but when we choose a location that has developed, of course this will be possible. easily generate profits from the business they run because most consumers certainly want the property they own to be in a developed location so they have easy access to get to the place they want and those who choose property in a developed location must of course be able to have a lot of funds to be able to own it, because property prices in that location are of course very high.

the thing is, rich people don't really care about what they are investing sometime, not to mention property has tendency of always increase in value, whether it's just gonna get abandoned or not the rich people couldn't really care, probably their purpose of buying property regularly is just to retain the value of their money and diversification.
the average person like us won't understand much about this because we don't posses too much money, every attempt acquiring property is a milestone for us but for these rich people its just another tuesday.
mainly because they already have the mean to earn money where it might generate them millions in a month anyway.

regarding your question, I think both could work as long as you have money, productive or unproductive property, doesn't matter as long as it grows your wealth.

To prepare for life in old age, we must look at prominent assets that can provide benefits to us even though we are no longer working. Houses and shophouses can be rented out so that we can enjoy the rental income in old age, in the area where I live, both prospects are very promising because people's needs for both continue to increase. After death, these assets can also be transferred to children so that they can still enjoy the results.

If the question is like that then it is definitely better to have a few assets and be able to ensure regular income. But if you have more money that has many assets it will be much better even though the benefits can be obtained in the future. Parents also prepare the necessities of life for their children and less productive assets can be given to children so that in their time the assets can have a much greater value.

Well that's not smart for those who acquired many properties that is not productive. I know a person and she was close to me, but the thing is that she already had a business and she was struggling to keep it afloat. However, she make a loan, and then buy another business in which I advise her not to because it's just going to be a big problem for her. She didn't believed me, and so she was like competing with his husband who had a business of his own. They are strange and complicated relationship and so I'm thinking that maybe she wants to proved something.

But after a couple of months, here new business didn't prosper and so she has to sell it again. So probably this is a great example of why we shouldn't acquire properties, we should be very careful so that we won't go to this example and just be smart in making decisions in our life and think about the consequences of it.

I see that the OP is from Nijeria. When I saw the story he tells, I wondered where it happens because where I live it is not at all common. Rich people may have some unproductive properties but for personal use, and if they have more properties they make sure they produce for them via rents or if they have land with crops. If you see a rich person's property that they don't use and don't get a return atm it's probably because they are speculating on the price going up and gaining from capital gains.


The problem is that this is easier said than done. If the area is growing fast, probably the expectation that the premises will be good for business is factored in the price. I have also known areas that were growing fast and stopped growing and were practically abandoned because of an economic crisis. In the end, in investment and business there is a risk factor that we cannot foresee.

That is the reason why considering the location of a real estate business is important because the challenges faced by real estate owners is location since people are more interested to acquire property in developed areas so it will be difficult for someone who owns a real estate in an undeveloped area to sell those assets when the need comes but places that are developed are the targets of most big investors without minding the high price because there are people that are looking for how to own property in a developed area but finds it difficult because people that owns properties in those areas are not ready to sell due to the high profits those properties generates for them. Even if real estate price skyrockets, so far as it is in a good and industrious area, selling such a property will not be a problem.
Just do your real estate business in a commercial area where businesses are growing rapidly and you will even see so many people coming to ask if you are interested in selling your property even without caring the amount you wish to sell it.

When someone is rich enough that he can't keep track of how much property he owns then these productive or whatever shit never applies because he managed to make such amount of money so I am sure he figured it out how to maintain them as well. There are other way someone can own property from their inheritance but if they lack managing skills then sooner or later they are going to sell everything. What really matters is asset that has value to it.

In the country where I live, real estate and land prices have skyrocketed and people who want to sell cannot find buyers. There are some who have started to lower prices, but the price is still too high and the sale is not happening. When the prices of such investment instruments suddenly rise too high, even if they seem profitable at first, they turn into bubbles in which you tie up your capital. Assets that you want to sell but cannot sell within a certain period of time are either too inflated or their real value is not what you expected.

One of the most important issues to be considered when investing, not being able to sell when the price is too inflated can put the investor in a difficult situation. Although real estate and land prices are decreasing day by day, these investments are no longer seen as the right investment choice because there are no buyers, especially in countries where credit is not available.

You have framed the question to be counter intuitive, so nobody is going to give you a reasonable argument because you have not put forward a good example. Most investors in properties are not going out and seeking "unproductive" properties to own - it has to pay for itself otherwise nobody would buy it and it would fall in price until it became "productive". People can sometimes make the wrong judgement when buying a property, but they generally learn from those mistakes and stop buying poorly priced properties. Only the rare few investors who stumble into a lot of money that they did not earn are likely to buy these poorly performing properties that you suggest and not many of those wealthy fools stay rich for long.

Real estate is not a bad investment, it is just that it is one that often moves very slowly unless there is a bubble, so in that case it would be better to try to acquire assets that generate a positive cash flow or to get assets that can appreciate faster than real estate, for example bitcoin, so if I had the money at my disposal I would disregard real estate, as real estate has an additional problem and that is that in the case of an emergency you cannot take the land with you, which ties you to a place for as long as you hold that property.

Many do not know the differences between assets and liabilities, that is why they end up purchasing items which they claim are assets to them but end up becoming a liability to them in the future. I personally do not see any item that generates no economic value and adds nothing to the owner's net worth as an asset. If a person decides to spend his money on items he will have to spend alot to maintain or pay a fortune on items that will depreciate in value in the nearest future without adding any value to the owner, that is entirely the owner's choice but it is not an adviceable way of planning for the future.

Rather than acquire lots of properties that will depreciate in no distant time, it is better to invest in any legal project that will generate lots of returns in the future.

After reading your post, one thing has come to my mind, the more jaggery you add, the sweeter it will be, but one more thing to note is that it is better to keep few useful things in the house than to fill the house with useless things because useless things go to waste and useful things are rare. Therefore, my opinion is that by building a lot of properties, there are properties that you do not even know where your property is.

So, it is better to keep as much as you can in your eyes and save as much as you can build the same amount of property and work hard for it and as you mentioned, relatives are missed a lot at the time of death or in old age, so you should take the people around you and your special relatives too. If the almighty has given you money and you have the opportunity, instead of accumulating unnecessary properties, make your relatives and close ones happy.

What I mean is about acquiring so many assets such that they may not recollect some of their properties due to how many the have become and some of those properties are left in bad conditions and untaken care of or lack of quality maintenance that will make them to be valuable in the future and they always put more effort and interest in the ones that generates larger income for them leaving behind the remaining ones to be in bad state and it's not only politicians that practices such, others even business men do emulate this habit of owning so many properties just because they have the money without caring if they are productive or not. I have seen a man from my state that own a lot of houses but not was leased or rented to generate income, all he did was to employ people who were maintaining the houses and the environments so this is the kind of people am talking about because if you must have a lot of properties then they have to bring proceeds for you instead of becoming unproductive.

These properties may be more than trophies or spreadsheet numbers. They can be revived and utilised to benefit the community.  Why not repurpose these buildings into affordable housing, community centres, or urban farms instead of letting them rot? Why not make these properties serve people? Im not against diversification. Its smart to invest broadly. If you buy properties randomly without a plan, you'll wind up with a lemon portfolio. Be strategic, man. You must consider how these properties can generate money, adapt to changing markets, and serve a purpose. Instead of vacant buildings, you may own flourishing enterprises, sustainable communities, and meaningful assets. Not just making money, but creating an effect.

One of the advantage on buying up some asset specially on real estate or simply having tons of buildings specially if its located on strategic locations then its value would really be that appreciating and on the years
passing by then you wont really be that able to notice it out that those investment that you had put on those early years did make out that significant increase of its value or simply making profits.
Basing up on the situation been stated on OP on which you have forgotten some of those properties then well its something that might be that possible but we do know that as a businessman
who do get used to on how to run up a business then having those skipped investment would really be that unlikely.

This is why we do really work hard our asses off just to have something that our family would be able to obtain or get on the moment that you do pass away.
This is something our primary target when it comes to this space.

I can relate with what the OP is saying, there are people who keeps acquiring so many properties that they cannot oversee. There is a popular hotelier in my country, he keeps building new hotels in every nook and cranny of some selected states, I heard that he has nearly 200 hotels in these states and he's still building more. I often wonder how this man can be able to oversee the affairs of his hotels because some of the hotels are poorly managed, he probably concentrates more on the newer ones. It would have been better if he had a few five star hotels than clearly over 100 two star hotels that most are not up to regular standard.

Never say it wrong as it is an absolutely right decision made especially when you feel no confidence in saving your money in the bank. We can't say it is not productive because once it is an asset, the value will grow from time to time. Buying land, joining real estate investment, etc., we can't feel the instant profit from them but after a few years, it is certain that we are multiplying our money. Perhaps, that is what we call investment, we harvest results after several years pass, and if we have multiple sources of income, we don't mind if these properties or assets will give us a small ROI. This is how rich people make millions and in their mind is to make more money. Normal people sometimes think that they are greedy but for me, they don't want to lose opportunities that is why even they already have a lot, they still acquiring more.

If we already have assets that can provide us with sufficient income to be able to meet our daily needs, of course this will mean we don't have to do tiring work anymore and if we still want to increase the wealth we already have, there's certainly nothing wrong with that. also choosing to enjoy the results that we have obtained from these assets is also not a problem for anyone because what we have achieved means we have the right to enjoy it and from the story you said, of course it would be very good for us to be able to have assets that can provide income for ourselves because if we are sick at an old age and cannot have assets, of course this will be very difficult for the people closest to us, this is truly something that no one wants.

A very important life lesson I learned in the past 2-3 years is that if you do have assets that make you money, then you could be retiring without need of anything else. A person I love is having some health issues, I don't want to get into detail, but she has money and assets, so most of the stuff is covered by her medically. I do help around as much as I can, which is why I believe that we are going to end up with a result that would not be all that bad, we should just consider how it would go without any issues if she didn't had assets, it would had so much assets in the end.

I personally believe that we are going to end up with a lot of assets in our life if we really think about our future. I want to have a lot of them before I get old and sick, so that I wouldn't be a burden for anyone at all.

I think there's this notion that "humans are never satisfied with accumulating more wealth and becoming wealthier." Rich people want to become richer rather than poor and have their net worth reduced. So, in order to improve, they definitely will continue to accumulate more assets, and they definitely will keep track of and keep records of all their assets. 

Just as you have said, some rich people accumulate assets until they even forget about some of the assets they have. Well, it happens, but not with tycoons or international entrepreneurs. The people who are in this category of becoming so wealthy that they will even forget about some of their assets are some greedy politicians who steal from the government. Some of them will receive a huge disbursement from the government that they are to use for a project, but they might not do the project or they might start the project and not finish it, and then they will convert the money to their personal funds. Some other rich people that fall into the category you are describing are those involved in illegal activities that generate millions to billions of dollars on a regular basis. 

Those kinds of rich people may not want the government to put their eye on them, so they would use that stolen and illegal money to acquire lots of properties, and some of those properties may not really be in their name. 

To answer your question, which I highlighted, rich people or any individual that is aspiring to be rich will always invest his or her money into an asset that they believe and expect to get profit from in the future. It doesn't matter the number of assets they invest in, but believe me, every rich man who is making his money legitimately will always keep track of all his assets. He doesn't even want to lose anyone.

What do you mean by productive and unproductive here?

Are you talking about the property that generates revenue like rental income instead of simply a villa that might never got any visit from the owner?

I would say people who became rich might know the answer to this already, having rental properties is good but people who have money that can't be spending in their entire life have a fantasy of owning a piece of land in multiple cities.

OP, I will like you to give me an example of such properties that are not income generating properties. Because if you are talking about having many houses, it is not a waste of money since someday the house can be sold in a very high price. I don't think that any rich man will want to get a property that does not increase in value as time passes by. Another thing that I observe is that some of these rich people buying properties that is not useful to them is because the money was stolen from somewhere and buying these properties is a way to hide the money without anyone knowing about such funds. People in the government and public offices are the ones doing this.

It would have been more better if you had listed those assets you think that wealthy people owns that are unproductive. Well it might seems that those properties are not productive in your eyes but deep down it's not as you are seeing it. Wealthy people like to diversify and that's why they invest in various assets. As an investor that has diversified into different forms of investments, you need to hire a portfolio manager to keep accurate records of your investments, and while you are doing that your wife, children and close family members should be aware of all your landed properties and their locations. You can keep photocopies of your documents with the portfolio manager but never the original copies.

Another reason why people invest in different assets is because you never can tell the government policies that will be favourable. A particular government will come into power and their policy will favour agricultural investors and when that government comes to an end and another government comes in, they might decide to shift from agriculture to construction and mining. Thus people who invested in that area will be the ones to benefit.That's why wealthy people always position themselves in all aspects of the economy so that any way the economy is heading to they will always benefit from it. So no investment is actually worthless, it could be worthless today but tomorrow it will worth something.

It is very unsafe to not disclose your property to your family, though you also highlighted writing of will there are people who wrote their will and entrust it to their lawyers and hiding it from their children or family because they don't want them to know their shares early anyways it is either you announce your will when you are still alive or some of your properties will be lost to another person.

When someone decides to diversify their funds into several types of assets, of course this is very profitable for them in the future and having unproductive types of property assets is not a problem if we have sufficient income to meet our living needs, but in choosing to invest in property, of course Of course, this would be very good if we could choose the type of property investment that can provide results. Of course, this would be better if the income we have is still limited to meeting the needs we have.
It is true that there are some people who sell their assets when they experience urgent needs, but if we can still maintain it, it would be better if we could look for other alternatives so that we can still maintain the property we already own.

My response is it is wrong to acquire properties that are a liability and not an asset. Before acquiring things in life, we should always know the difference between an asset or a liability. From the story you highlighted, owning landed properties is quite a good asset just that people forget what they own sometimes I ask myself how that is even possible. But it happens. There was a compound I know about it was said that the owner had forgotten about the compound and now the tenants are living in that apartment for years without paying any rent year to year Because the owners has forgotten about them.

The thing is there is a level of wealth one would have you won't be able to manage all your properties. In my own opinion, I would say instead of acquiring those properties we should use the money to invest because that is what we yield good money for us over the years.

Yes it is advisable to own alot of assets or diversify into different denomination provided those asset are productive or can be sold to get back something in return. Any money invested in property is liable to have something in return. though it may be that some properties may not be a productive asset like bitcoin investment or any other form of investment, but just a property to sell when there is challenges or when the need arises. there is alot of people who had properties, when they had challenges above there capital, they sold their property. what am trying to say is that we should have property everywhere sothat when we are of age, or don't have  fund, we may sell those property to recover some funds to settle pressing need.

Owning too many properties leads to loss of some of the properties because it's not all that you can be able to manage by yourself so it will surely lead to entrusting it in the hands of other people who you feel you trust and in the end they can undue and betray you and made away with those properties without a trace and since they have the documents in their possession that means the case may just die off.
Owning landed properties is a very good asset if you buy with the intention of reselling in the future instead of buying a landed property and erecting a structure that will be abandoned after completion. Apart from acquiring too many properties investing on human capacity development is also a very good way to make investments because those people will be made through you and the circle continues because some other people will also benefit from them as well.

Having lots of assets is very important for us because our life is not always beautiful, by being able to develop our business and by being able to save with some assets that is a very good achievement, with assets we have more or less saved ourselves from the economic crisis in the future. the upcoming one.

Assets in the form of property can become movable assets for us, that way we can be calmer in our old age. By focusing on movable assets, we can enjoy them. We have to think carefully about property assets, because there are many parties involved, in terms of workers and managers, whether good or bad depends on how we manage it, the assets we can get a lot don't have to be property, we can also get other things to increase our own assets.

Op, this is a very interesting topic, I must commend your effort in bring this piece of writing here, for me, believe acquiring asset should be done not only for future benefit they can settle immediate needs waiting for the future to come, many wealthy people fall this victim of acquiring properties that are not meaningful and thats because of greed or may be because the owner was into problem that made him or her decide to sell at a cheaper price, i suport that buying what you cant sustain is not economically or business wise, i believe that once an individual decides to acquire assets, it is for business purposes not for show up.
Most times corrupt politicians buy this properties or assets with embezzled and stolen funds thats why they are always in haste to acquire property anytime even though it may be abandoned or forgotten by them, they want to make sure that the money is not in their possession to avoid trace.
I think an individual who is business minded that earned his money legitimately, will want to acquire assets or property that he or she can be able to remember or sustain, a wealthy business minded person believes that it doesn't matter how many asset you have, what really matter is your ability to remain relevant in business for future benefits.

 
You don't have to agree with me on anything concerning Dangote and his wicked life. Many business you see today that dangote is doing, he collected them from other business men by force. Let me give two good examples. First, Cement: Cement was first produce by another person and it was called "Elephant Cement" and as of then Cement was sold as the rate #500 and your so called favorite dangote asked the FG to stopped the person so he can produce it which the then President did OBJ, and today a bag of cement is #10,000. And Indomie noodles were manufactured by another person but your dangote also asked the FG, to stopped the person and he us producing Indomie noodles and a packet is 300 which was 50 to 70 Naira.
And now that has taken over the petroleum industry. Fuel price will increase to 1800 Naira. Are you also aware that Dangote is one of the Members in the Nigeria Economic Team? When someone has too much property it intoxicate the person. Yesterday Newspaper said, Dangote refineries are not to reduce fuel price but to make it abundance yet we have not seen anything. And On the 30th of last month, Dangote was crying that FG gave license to other marketers to sell dirty fuel. Now Dangote is selling clean fuel and the fuel we were buying from American now is dirty.

Some riches own many properties to make them popular, they doesn’t care if it is productive or not, owning some properties is good because if you own a company, factory, or industries and you employed people it will reduced the rate of unemployment, but it is not advisable for someone to acquired many properties that he won’t be able to focus on, owning many properties Is now like a competition to some riches, they always want to be richer than each other

Indeed it is substantial to acquire asset for the sake of our future, you don’t have to invest in many things to showoff, even just a property can stand as an asset if you make it productive, for example if you own a private health care and you put all your attention on it, it will develop stronger and become standard, when a time come that you don’t have power to work anymore the health care will be supportive and beneficiary to you

Acquiring properties is good but it must be done sensibly as well. If it has come to the level of agents conspiring to deprive you of your properties, then you do not know what you are doing. All properties should be well-documented and periodically audited for maintenance and accountability with the involvement of your lawyer(s). This is not new to the rich men who earned their money through legal means or at least the means they can defend under any circumstances, unlike those who are buying properties through illegalities and proxies like shell corporation arrangements that are now popular among money launderers.

Once it is being termed an asset, it is never worthless, it is valuable and will always sustain what it's being called. And yes, it is good to have your properties/assets, they will not betray you as a wealthy person (to keep the status) when you need them. This is especially true when all fails, they will not fail you. In reality, this is what many business gurus fall back on when other things fail them even as I watched a documentary of a wealthy Indian billionaire that went from tens of billions of dollars to $0 a few decades ago. He is still living fine today due to the assets he had bought when things were rosy. And of course, this is a very good way to indirectly Insure the future of your children and loved ones.

For this, you can never go wrong with the asset purchase, but just be accountable for them and not just buy and forget them.

That is the beauty of owning properties. Aside from the valuation appreciation, you can let your children inherit it. As a parent, we all want the best for our kids before we pass away.

Being irresponsible of not doing such will let your children face the consequences of it. Your legacy is what you give to your children so that they can live freely while learning all the grit of life and so as they grow, they will also achieve owning their first property.

It will be advisable or better to own few quality property over quantity or numerous property's that doesn't add value to our finances. Having so many unproductive properties can become liability because properties require maintenance to keep them in good shape, the cost of maintenance can be a huge burden. According to a philosopher "if the purpose of thing is not known abuse is inevitable". Without knowing the purpose of owning so many property's, can certainly lead to mismanagement of funds for example owning a rental property with the aim of generating income requires proper management and maintenance to ensure its purpose is served. Owning so many properties is not bad but understanding the need and purpose, so that it can  be managed and utilise effectively is very necessary.  When it come come acquiring of properties, what should be considered can it be productive and income generating to secure financial balance. It's better to own few assets ensuring good maintenance and managed properly in other to serve its purpose.

From a normal perspective it makes much more sense to earn productive assets than unproductive ones. When buying properties you can speculate on rising land prices to resell the property in a few years with a nice profit, but there can always be a crisis that could postpone our sale. Which is why we should be buying properties that can be rented out so we can generate income in the meantime. Comparing our best action to rich people is not really helpful, because they are already rich. Just look at the large number of summer homes rich people have. These homes are empty 80% of the year and don't generate any income. Renting out these homes for only 1-2 months would already cover all the bills and still people are not doing it. The super rich are even worse, they usually take all their belongings with them. So when they go to their summer home, they have to pay a moving company to move all the stuff around. Don't copy the rich, better do what is best in your personal situation.

There was a man I once heard about, the man bought bikes and tricycle bike more than 100 and was renting it out to people but it gets to a point when the people who are hiring it was stealing it. However it's good for a man who's acquiring properties as asset to try and acquire the ones that they can protect, because there are people that do the otherwise in other to make a living. Landed properties are easy to protect as long as the documents are intact. So a landed property is the best way to own an asset, think about buying a land for $20M and years after you sold it for $80M.

There are different factors to this point that you are raising. It depends on the person's intellectual capacity to run those businesses or own those properties, the purpose and type of property or business. If you grow your business into LTD or PLS then you know that it would be handled by share holders to an extent and even if you are gone, the business or property will still be alive. However, regards to property, there is a part about the owner and the family. Some people don't disclose their property to their families and when they grow into dementia, they won't be able to remember all that they have. This is why writing of will is important depending on how rich you are, you might forget some properties when you don't disclose to family members.

From the beginning you made a statement later you answered yourself and at last you asked a question again.
It is very wise to own multiple properties not because you have the money in excess but it is investment there is no investment that is ever enough because you have offspring coming after you, but like you've highlighted the most important thing their is to know about your investment. If you check around the society today many young ones on the street are there because there parents did not lay the ground for them.

I heard of a king who had alot of properties before he died he made sure he settled his children with all the properties and today the children are not carrying their papers around and if they do so for their children, properties from the foundation have paid off.

It is very good for us to know the difference between quality and quantity. Even if you have to own a property or properties, it's better you go for the ones that are valuable assets and not the ones that are finished already. Because if you choose to go for these ones that are valuable, they are going to make you earn passive income which your money will be working for. you can be sleeping and be making money since their value keep on increasing . And you will have nothing to lose. But as for these ones that are finished already, their value will be depreciating which would lead to decrease in your income.

It does not hurt to get extra assets or properties especially when it is in a real estate.  Lands tends to appreciate overtime so many wealthy people acquire lands even if they end up in an abandoned state.  Just like in my place.  A once marsh area was once acquired by some wealthy person, and just let it be without doing any effort to improve it.  Over the span of time, this place got some illegal settlers and these people improve the environment by filling the marsh into a solid land.  At the end the owner claim the area which is now a hundred times higher than its initial acquisition value.

I am sure that these wealthy individuals who acquired properties and assets and did not bother to improve them have their main assets that generate more than enough for them.


There are individual who are fond of accumulating assets that appreciate over time even without doing anything.  These are smart investors and making use of patience to reap higher reward in the future.  I do not think it is unwise to do such strategy.  As a matter of fact I see these people genius. 

I believe people never forget their assets and investments, it won't be abandoned or forgotten unless the person dies or is in a state where memory fails him.

 

Anyone who has so much property and those not know where some of them are is either unwise, criminal, or mentally sick. It is simply to file all your properties and keep them in a safe place. You can also hire the services of asset managers to handle your properties. I said the person is a criminal because many corrupt politicians in my country might have properties they can't account for. This is because they steal billions and give the money to people to assist them in buying properties. So they might end up not knowing where they are located because they didn't work hard to secure them. Poor mental health could also affect the memory of people.

There is no need to acquire too many properties because you want to save for the future. It is not in the quantity but the quality. Having a few well-located properties can give you returns more than several properties. You don't buy properties without a comprehensive evaluation of the future value and profitability of the business. One can decide to buy farmland in a rural area for agribusiness, that's not a bad investment. You can also decide to buy or build a house in an urban area for rent. It all depends on proper planning.

Most big men give less priority to some of their properties and focuses on just few that gives them high profits but acquiring properties just because you want to show off that you are a wealthy person to me is a waste of resources and money if there are assets that are bringing forth reasonable amount of money then they have to keep maintaining those assets and not buy too many properties. Acquiring properties that you don't know some of the properties you own due to how plenty they are is a very bad practice.

I don't agree with you about Aliko Dangote because regardless of the fact that he's rich, we all know he's a business man and almost all his assets are productive and that is the reason why he has ventured and diversified into doing a lot of things just to maintain his status and the money keeps coming from different angles so his own is okay as a wealthy man he is, unlike people that just build houses and own some properties scattered everywhere when those properties are unproductive.

If there are those people that have been involved on a deal and the owner doesn't have knowledge if these people are trying to take his properties, they shouldn't be confident about that. It seems that he's playing the part that he doesn't really care about his/her properties but in reality, they're all audited and he's knowledgeable with all of those because they're are all asset.

If I am capable of owning properties, I'd acquire as much as I can. Others might not see how valuable they are if they're unproductive and the place isn't worth it for now. But as time passes by, the development continuous from area to area and that's where its value is going to increase. So, whichever is perfect for me, I'd buy as much as I can and as long as I can afford them whether it will generate passive income or not because the appreciation of each property is there.

When you are already that rich then it would really be impossible that you wont really be having a lists about on the properties or buildings that you do have if ever you are focusing when it comes to real estate business on which this is something that will really be that unlikely that you will be forgetting. This is why on the moment that you do find yourself having that tons of source of income then it cant really be avoided that you might be missing up something but in my part then it would really be that impossible or unlikely yet when it comes to money management or business then i would really be monitoring everything. Speak about into those people who do have make use or abuse you because they do have SPA's? then it is possible but on the moment on acquiring  all the legal documents then there's no way these people would be able to get it in the end
on which simply means that your family or loved ones would really be still the one who would really be benefiting in the end.

It is really just that they might be taking up some advantage into you due to tons of properities you do have if ever you had forgotten but since you do have those documents
about its ownership then you would really be always have the edge.

Many of these business people have a plan that ultimately works around leverage. If you are able to get the mortgage on ten properties with a 5% deposit on each, then get tenants to fill them (whether residential or corporate units) then they can hopefully pay off the building. If you're doing the same thing with only 5 properties and a 20% deposit on each, you have greater security (the person lending you the money takes on more risk) but will only have 5 builds at the end of it and not ten. It's a longer term strategy but when it pays off it gives the owners a lot more capital. Now, the government should definitely be stepping in if the owners are not correctly maintaining buildings as per their legal obligations, but that is another matter.

Both paths are valid, what happens is that if you chose the latter route then you need to keep an eye on those projects so they keep generating as much money as possible for you, however if a person is already tired of this as they have done it all their lives, or they simply do not want to pursue that kind of lifestyle, the former strategy makes more sense to them as they can buy a property, forget about it and later resell it at a higher price once the demand for that property has increased.

Op I understand your point. Many people have invested in different kind of properties that they don't even know most of their properties again and as a big man, you would not like to do most of the project like that and they sent people to do it and some of those unfaithful servants would convert some those projects to themselves l. I have witnessed this in my location. So I also prefer a wealthy man acquiring few assets that can provide good income for the owner than owing many properties that they can manage.
Dangote in Nigeria will face the same calamity because the guy wants to invest in all ramifications of business. Cement, Sugar, Rice, Salt, Oils, Floors, Indomie, noodles, Crude Oil etc. Which is wrong and this are some of the reasons why things are costly because there is no division of labor for workers. And everything centered in one man.

owning large some of different properties is aimed at the expansion of networth which could largely deplete if it's been held in fiat currency. Where the laws doesn't give a restraint to the amount of properties an individual should acquire then there's nothing wrong about owning properties in any amount. It's a right.

The perspective of the wealthy and the average person on the street (probably a wage earner) about acquisition of assets of all sorts is quite different. It's common for the average person to conclude it to be a waste of funds but it's not so looking through the lens of the wealthy.

Yes, no argument about some of these properties getting into the hands of their lawyers and agents or caretakers but that often happen when the wealthy individual doesn't reveal to his family about all of those assets he possesses down to the least while he's still breathing.
 Or a suggestion which I feel could be useful to any opulent wealthy guy reading this; you probably could make a video record where you make list of all properties you own and their locations and documents and who is standing as a caretaker for it. By so doing you don't have to worry about losing them to strangers when you're gone. Cool!

What i understand why many people acquires series of properties or wealth is that they set it up for their generations as you can see the world is changing gradually and inflation is really eaten up almost all countries. At their time they may decide that acquired whatever property they feels like having this applicable to politicians who are on power and when they leave office they could used some of those properties to sustain themselves like they could decide to sell off any when time for needs arises.

Some of them ends setting up companies or businesses that could stand even when they aren't on power to help them when the needs arises also you must also know that no wealthy man who has tasted riches that would want to go low below their presents stands hence they try's all things possible to acquire as much many properties they could to maintain their Richie and some of these people also planned their lives include that of their family and relatives so they won't go broke or ever be poor again in their lineage.

To owned numerous properties across the country isn't bad or illegal but part of investment. Infact if the wealthy people uses their excess Cash to build,owned and acquire various companies,build schools and health centres it will help to curb unemployment,poverty and crime in the society.So it is even encouraging for a wealthy/rich folks to acquire more assets.

Hello and welcome to capitalism. In order to proceed you need to abandon all common sense 

If someone gets rich, he can acquire so many means of production that there would be no reasonable way to control them all on his own. Capitalism rewards being rich by making you richer and also making everyone else comparatively poorer because the rich get richer but only at everyone else's expense.

But also owning property isn't a means of production. There's nothing productive about a house. A house is a basic necessity for one tombe able to produce. But it's not changing the state of anything. A house won't change raw rare earth to bars of metal, therefore adding value to them. A house just stands there in perpetuity. It requires no labour and produces no outcomes.

And also as OP said, those hoarding property have no reasonable way of controlling it all at once in their own. Much of it falls under delapitated states. Other times the quality of services provided to renters is extremely bad since no one attends to them etc. But what can you do? Nearly every country in the world has private property "rights" engrained in its constitution. In spite of history having proven again and again that wealth inequality leads to gross inequality, we fall in the same mistake. If you want to change this now there's nothing short of a revolution that could help. The real question is, who's really up for it?

If the properties are unproductive, they can't bring proportionate any aid for us in the future... Therefore, it doesn't make sense to own them, because besides bringing extra expenses to the owner (as we have to pay yearly tributes over our properties), there are also risks the government seize them due to the properties not being used by the owner. So the government takes the property for itself, auction it or give it to the poors through social welfare programs.

Usually, this kind of situation is more common among heirs who received lots of properties from their ancestors and don't know how to maintain their productiveness or how to adapt the properties to the circumstances an demands of the present moment. Then they become obsolete. Internal disputes between family members is also a common reason why we see decaying unused properties.

This usually happens in a country without a proper system. In developed countries, the taxes you'll pay on those properties won't allow a person to have a property that is unproductive while paying tax on it. So it's either they'll make it productive so paying the taxes won't be a problem they'll sell it off.
But in a country where the rich get away with anything, nobody bothers them about taxes, especially if they're in bed with government agents. They can legit have no idea about the state of a property or asset.

It's good to own assets and properties, but having something more of a liability than an asset is not very prudent. It simply means you're taking profit from somewhere else to fund the expenses of the other which would mean running a loss. The goal is to make a profit and one of the ways of making profits is to minimise cost as much as possible while maintaining an above-standard production

Of course this is not efficient way of investment since you don’t total control on how you will manage your asset therefore your is just sleeping/losing in an asset that is not performing well for a long time.

Fiat money is depreciating its buying power due to inflation so you will just waste your money power if you will invest it on non moving assets. Bank interest is much better compared to this dead assets since they might turn into liabilities once it’s starting to give you losses in long term just because you didn’t notice it anymore.

For me I will actually say is not advisable to own too many properties that are not yielding any valuable result. Owning too many properties here and there can only lead to divided attention. But when you have few assets, you can be able to control, manage and established it to any standard of your choice that will make it more productive. Remember the saying 'A bird at hand is worth more better than two in the bush'.

As long as they have money and the country allow people to own property as many as they want, they can buy many properties including the unproductive ones. Advisable or not, if it can make you to earn a lot money in the future, why not? I believe if you're the rich, you will buy as many as you can and didn't care at all with people who want to buy properties.

We still have an option to move to underdeveloped country if you want to buy property.

It's something they can brag though. There must be a plan before they think of buying those properties otherwise there won't be a reason to buy them. Or they just speculate the price of these properties will go up in the future as it usually does. Whether it's productive or not, it's still an investment.

The rich retired men are always talking about the stuff they own. Makes them look richer than their friends. As if they can bring those properties with them when they die but at least they can give them to their beloved sons and daughters.

It's a thing of choice though as some people just prefer owning some properties just for owning sake. They don't mind if their property aren't productive, they just continue to acquire the wealth regardless. Some on the other hand, own properties for future sake, like for their children to acquire them when they become old enough. But to me, it would still be better to get properties that would earn us some reasonable amount of income continually for a long term. You don't actually have to limit your property, you can continue acquiring if you have enough money to buy more.

It baffles me how some wealthy people in our society, instead of owning few productive properties that will stand as assets which will generate proceeds for them, they often enter into owning so many properties which some of them are left in dilapidated state and some of these wealthy men doesn't even know how many properties they've got because of how numerous they have become and sometimes some of the people who either stand as agents, witnesses or attorney that was involved in the business dealings hijacks some of these properties without the knowledge of the owner simply because they also have some of the owners documents in their possession.
                      For sure we are meant to acquire assets that will stand out for us in the future especially a time when we will no longer have much experience, energy and strength to work again in order to earn a living so our assets gives us the liberty to enjoy the fruits of our labour when we get old and these asset also stands as aid to people around us more especially our offsprings or relatives who are very dear to us at a time when we answer the "call of nature" (death).
                     My question is that is it advisable to own too many properties that are unproductive with the expectations that they would stand as aids to us in the future or should we just own few assets and make sure they are of the best standards and are generating money for us regularly?