Why Buy to Rent? - IIPE OEI

Become a homeowner

As for the question of whether to buy or rent a home, some believe that buying a home is not an attractive financial transaction.

Read also : How to create an EARL?

These people are simply wrong.

I insist: it is a monumental error in judgment and, above all, very costly.

You may also like : Why pursue higher education?

Did a mysterious hall of rental property owners go through this?

Get your free training

This free course will teach you how to get started in real estate investment in 3 steps:

Click here

Buying your home, especially when you are still young, is still an absolutely smart and sensible decision today.

You can learn more about this topic by getting this book that I am giving you for free: click here.

We are in France

First of all, we need to eliminate the reasoning from the debate between buying or renting based on a set of circumstances that have nothing to do with what we know in our countries, but which have profoundly affected our minds.

This is particularly the case in the United States where the real estate bubble of the 2000s led to a disaster that began in 2008. The real estate market was devastated. We wondered if prices would stop falling.

We have not experienced this situation here at all, but financial advice like “it’s not the right time to buy, you should wait for prices to drop again” or “don’t take out a mortgage to buy a home” which seemed justified (and then) in the United States, have swept through here.

No reason.

Without considering the huge differences in the economy, culture, and real estate situation.

And of course, there was also the real estate crisis in Spain and Portugal. Nothing to do with what is happening in France, Belgium, Canada, or Switzerland. And even in all the countries where there has been a serious problem for a number of years, the situation is starting to reverse, and I bet you a record of Leffe that in the long term everything will be fine.

But the perverse result of all this is that some continue to assert that investing in your home is a bad idea, and that you can achieve higher returns elsewhere.

They argue that buying ties you down forever and kills your freedom. That maintenance costs are far too high. That it’s better to rent so that your landlord pays all the expenses.

But the 2 most commonly used arguments to claim that renting is better are:

you must first invest in rental properties because otherwise your borrowing capacity of 33% of your income is in default (I will show later how absurd this is),
your home is not an asset, but an expense (this fable has been propagated by ignorant followers of Robert Kiyosaki who uses it in his books, especially in “Rich Dad Poor Dad”. I will explain later why this is false on any line).

All the arguments encountered, even if they seem logical for a short period, are absolutely flawed in the face of the truth of the numbers and the absurdity of the reasoning.

Moreover, all these arguments are based on totally outdated figures since interest rates are so low now, and on reasoning that has been in mode for some time but has since shown that it is obsolete or even completely wrong.

Owning your own home has always been the safest way to build wealth

Nothing has changed today.

Except in our time, we are increasingly thinking short term.

I have already demonstrated several times on this site that homeownership is always a better deal than renting your whole life. And I will gladly do it again in this post.

But first of all, we need to ask ourselves an important question: how is it that what has always been traditional wisdom — buying your own home is an excellent financial transaction — is no longer an interesting prospect for some?

The answer is the problem of the time perspective when you have to decide between buying or renting.

We no longer have a long-term vision of our future. We optimize our lives for small instant rewards instead of big profits in the future.

Even if becoming a homeowner can surely earn you hundreds of thousands of euros over your lifetime, and thus be one of the best financial decisions you can make in your life, the bad financial advice you sometimes see today hides all this in favor of an absolutely narrow and distorted view of what your life will be in the very short term.

You deserve much better.

How to calculate whether it is better to buy or rent?

Suppose you are 25 years old and need to decide whether to buy or rent your home.

You have found in your research articles written by supposedly well-paid financial experts who will sell you the idea that owning is a waste of money, and that you can enjoy an extraordinary life and unmatched wealth if you don’t.

Is that true?

To start, tell yourself that in general, these people are obviously homeowners themselves.

And then ask yourself why they haven’t followed their own advice.

And it is true that if you buy a home, you need to do your homework to ensure you buy something that has and will retain its value.

But everything else is absurd.

Take a look at this table compiled by Meilleurtaux.com. And these figures are of course valid for Belgium, Switzerland, Canada, and practically all other countries.

How many years for buying to be more interesting than renting (70m2 apartment)?

You will quickly understand that it is more interesting to become a homeowner than to rent.

By studying the 2nd column of the table above, you learn that buying your home pays off at least after ONE year (Mulhouse, Perpignan, Le Havre, Brest) and at most after 12 years (in Paris, one of the most expensive places in the world to buy).

Conclusion: buying rather than renting is therefore more interesting in some cases after just 1 year already! And at worst(in Paris of course) after 12 years already!

Of course, 12 years seems like a huge amount of time. And so, since it is fashionable today to think only about 2 or 3 years, we draw the wrong conclusions.

Just remember that the average life expectancy in our countries is now over 82 years, for both men and women.

Therefore, if you are 25 years old, and you need to decide whether to buy or rent, this is what it really means: at 25 years old, you still have a life expectancy of over 57 years, which is four times the time it takes to recoup your purchase. And it is only in Paris and Bordeaux that the situation is so unfavorable.

In all other cases, profitability is already achieved between one and 10 years!

In other words, by becoming a homeowner at 25, you generally save 30 to 60 years of rent.

Homeowners are on average 21 times richer than renters

In its annual report on the standard of living and wealth of the French, published in June 2018, INSEE (National Institute of Statistics, people guaranteed to know how to calculate) finds that the wealth gap is widening between homeowners and those who do not own.

“Homeownership and primary residence are particularly discriminatory,” write the authors of the Insee study, Aline Ferrante and Rosalinda Solotareff: “The gross wealth of buyers stands at 265,000 euros, quite close to that of homeowners without a mortgage, which reaches 285,600 euros, but far from renters whose wealth amounts to 13,200 euros.”

I was not the only one who wrote this.

These are solid but ruthless statistics.

So I will not invent anything.

This is not the Brialy House kind.

It is as it is and not otherwise: it is better to buy than to rent.

And I put this phrase in red so that you can remember it, because I will come back to it later, as it contains a hidden treasure.

As in France the average value of buildings has appreciated by more than 10% per year since 2000, by 8.75% since 1900 (Friggit Curves), homeowners are therefore on average 21 times richer than poor renters.

It is normal, since 1,000 euros invested in real estate in 1950 is worth 100,000.

It is a multiplication factor of 100.

Another way to explain it is to imagine this situation: if you bought a property in 1950 for 100,000 francs, you could sell it today for 10 million francs (1.5 million euros). And in the meantime, poor renters have only paid rent at a loss, making their landlord richer every month.

Buy or Rent Calculator

At the end of 2018, a loyal reader of this site, Yann D., wrote to me:

“While trying to calculate exactly the advantage of buying rather than renting, I came across this calculator, which takes everything into account, including the opportunity cost of investing the difference in monthly rent, or rent – monthly payment:

https://www.alto-informatique.com/demos/acheter-ou-louer

I thought you might be interested.

By browsing the site leboncoin and looking for apartments that are already rented (to see the amount of rent mentioned in the description), I was able to do calculations, and in all the tests I did, it was always more advantageous to buy than to rent.

‘At the beginning of 2019, I also took on the task, I tried with 50 rentals spread across France, and I came to the same conclusion.

I then asked 1,000 subscribers to my newsletter if they could do the actual calculations with their own housing. I received 236 positive responses, with the result of their calculations (thank you friends!).

The results?

In 67% of cases, profitability is achieved in less than 10 years.
In 25% of cases, profitability is achieved in less than 20 years.
In 8% of cases, profitability is achieved in less than 25 years.
There were no cases where renting was more interesting than buying.

“Renting your home costs, on average, over a human lifetime, more than 500,000€ more than buying.”

Get your free training

This free course will teach you how to get started in real estate investment in 3 steps:

CLICK HERE

Buy as quickly as possible

Renting your home costs, on average, over a human lifetime, more than 500,000€ more than buying.

Yes, you read that right: half a million euros more.

And this figure does not even take inflation into account!

If we take inflation into account, it is of course several million euros in savings between buying and renting.

Obviously, the longer you wait to buy, the less you will save.

So buy as quickly as possible!

The reasoning remains valid anyway, no matter what age you are today.

Certainly, if retirement is approaching, it is essential to have become a homeowner.

Imagine that I found articles using the same table as above to conclude that it is better to rent rather than buy.

And the main reason given to assert this absurdity is that 12 years (in Paris) is definitely too long to make your purchase profitable. 12 years on a life expectancy of 82 years! And what about residents of Mulhouse who make their purchase profitable after one year?

This is where we are at our time: some so-called financial advisors no longer recognize the essential value of their business: time as the main ally of the good investor.

Who are they mocking?

Becoming a homeowner is actually much more interesting than the figures mentioned above suggest

I did not take into account the value of your property at the end of your mortgage repayment or at the time of your retirement. Even if the value of your property had not appreciated during those long years, which would be very surprising if you look at long-term statistics — yes, long term! — real estate prices, you will have a large sum of money at your disposal if you sell to finance your retirement. Or your heirs the day you are no longer in this world. The person who rented has built nothing as wealth, except the property of the landlord of their home.
The model used to calculate the difference between buying or renting incorrectly accounts for the effect of inflation on your monthly expenses. When you buy your home with a fixed-rate mortgage, not only do your repayments remain fixed in nominal terms, but in real terms, they decrease regularly due to (or rather, in this particular case, thanks to) inflation. On the other hand, it is exactly the opposite if you rent. Your rent will be indexed every year. This rent, which seems quite manageable at first, becomes unbearable after a certain time, and over the average mortgage term of 20 years, the difference between this rent and a mortgage payment becomes gigantic.
If renters spend 35% of their income on housing, the effort rate drops to 15% for homeowners (32% for first-time buyers, because all beginnings are difficult!). More than two-thirds of renters claim that their housing budget impacts their food and clothing, which they have to cut back on to pay their rent (according to a study by the OpinionWay Institute for the credit establishment Sofinco).
The earlier you buy, and the longer you live, the wealthier property makes you.

Some other fallacious arguments

If you are a big fan of renting for life (or one of those experts I just mentioned above), you are probably now fuming with anger at me. And you are ready to send me a torrent of arguments to prove that I am wrong.

I just hope I have been able to convince you of what is obvious.

But well, you never know, and before flooding my mailbox with comments, here is already my response to the most popular arguments used in favor of renting in the great debate between buying or renting.

1. I want to travel and not be tied down. I want to be liiiiiiiiiiiiiiibre.

This is an argument that has very little coherence, and it is rooted in the rather bizarre belief that if you own a home, you are obliged to be a slave to it, to never leave the house, to be chained to your mortgage and to work forever in sweat.

All of this is completely false.

Here too, buying or renting is a false dilemma.

If you want to travel and be free, you can rent out your home and charge someone else (that’s called a tenant!) to pay off your mortgage and increase your wealth as you explore the world.

For those who have already called me a dinosaur with the argument that we need to be flexible in our time and be able to move regularly to find work everywhere (which is sometimes true), the answer is the same.

Personally, I have changed cities 6 times in my life, but fortunately that did not prevent me from owning! I ended up with 6 properties that I rented out each time, that’s all, and it’s not more complicated than that.

Because if you rent out your property, you are doing exactly what a landlord does today with the money from their tenants: becoming rich by making their tenant poor.

And is there really that much work to owning? Probably not much more than being a tenant. And you can always hire a real estate agency to manage your property. All you have to do is raise your money.

I’m sure that’s within your means?

2. Where I live, it’s cheaper to rent

Certainly.

For the moment.

When you are a tenant, you are at the mercy of the life cycles of rents and mortgage interest rates.

Throughout your life, you will see these parameters go up and down.

But in the long term of your life (and I hope of course that your life lasts as long as possible), it has always been shown that the total cost of renting is higher than the total cost of ownership.

And at the time of your death, you will obviously have built nothing as wealth by having rented your whole life.

And after that, of course, but what do you have to read articles like this if that’s what you really think?

And the example of that brave man in his thirties who proclaims on his site about co-living how proud he is to rent his villa in Mauritius rather than buy it (this villa costs 590,000€ excluding notary fees and the BOI, which handles investment files for expatriates) does not seem (not at all) relevant and representative of the reality of most French people. Are you really going to buy a villa in an enclave for the rich in Mauritius as your first home? Are you really going to commit to your first home with a mortgage that costs at least 3,150€/month for 20 years?

Not me.

I hope not you either.

3. I rent because I don’t want to worry about paying taxes, repaying a loan, maintenance, and all other property-related expenses

Oh my God!

What an argument!

When you rent, you obviously pay all these things too, which are of course included in your rent. And you have to make a transfer to pay that rent. And you even pay a little (a lot) more because you have to compensate the landlord for their work.

Think about it: do you really think someone is really crazy enough to stay and lose money? On the contrary, rental properties exist only to make money off the tenant.

It’s normal; if no one made a profit from this activity, it would disappear.

4. Becoming a homeowner is a bad investment. You would be better off investing your money elsewhere.

That is not true.

Not because I don’t think there are other good investments besides real estate: I am a big fan of investment funds.

And not because I think you couldn’t be a good investor.

And I am the first to say that we should invest in real estate and invest in financial investments. One complements the other; one does not preclude the other.

But the problem is simply that if you are a tenant, you must first pay your rent, and it will therefore be difficult to invest in more money to match the investment you could have made in real estate.

It is very good to invest in financial products.

I do it too.

But when everything goes wrong, your home will always be your ultimate shelter.

Not your investment funds.

5. I rent a great house with five other friends. I could never buy the same property.

You are comparing apples and oranges.

It’s great to have your friends pay most of your rent; it would be even better to have them pay to repay your mortgage.

6. If my property increases in value, I will have to pay more taxes!

Yes, yes!

This is an argument that I really received in the comments of my articles.

This actually means that you do not want to make more money because you will have to pay more taxes.

And that in fact, you do not want to be rich.

What do you want me to respond to that?

7. Interest rates are too high. It’s not the right time to buy.

Until now, interest rates have never been so low.

But they will come back, of course, one day.

Sometimes they are high, sometimes they are very low.

But all this is short-term reasoning. Don’t let your decision to buy or rent depend solely on this parameter.

I myself bought my first home in the late 70s with a mortgage at a rate of 9%!

And my first investment property in 1983 at a time when rates were 15%!

These are rates that young people today can’t even imagine!

And so? That didn’t stop me from making a good deal in the long term, and because of that, I became rich.

On the contrary, it was that decision (against the opinion of all those idiots who advised me to wait for interest rates to drop) that was the foundation of my rapid financial independence!

The important thing is to buy a property that is worth its money, and that has the potential to maintain its value.

If interest rates are too high at the time of your purchase, you can still refinance your mortgage later.

8. It is better to rent so that you do not fall and touch your debt ratio

Here, I can be brief: I wrote a whole article on the dramatic financial ignorance of those who think this.

Contrary to what many seem to think, owning your own home generally does not change your borrowing capacity.

However, since 2020, the concept of effort rate for granting mortgage borrowers up to 33% has emerged, which makes borrowing for rental property much less easy than before.

This new provision is fully explained, with its calculation method, and possible workarounds in lesson 40 of my real estate training. Instructions for use.

9. Your own home is not an asset

This is the old argument that our friend Robert Kiyosaki uses in his books, particularly in his bestseller “Rich Dad Poor Dad.”

Kiyosaki, and unfortunately this is not the first time, would have done better to keep quiet.

The flaw in his reasoning (which was very widespread at one time by many who would do well to revise their accounting course: a student who serves me this, I will roast mercilessly!) is thinking that an asset must generate cash flow to be defined as such.

Unfortunately for Kiyosaki and his ignorant followers, the definition of an asset is an extremely precise and well-documented accounting and financial concept, whose terms do not need to be invented for the benefit of his false demonstration.

An asset is an identifiable item of assets of an economic agent (such as a household) that has positive economic value, meaning it generates a resource that it controls as a result of past events and from which the agent expects future economic benefits.

A home clearly fits this definition, as it is an identifiable item of wealth that has positive economic value and belongs to the household in question.

And the best illustration that a home is an asset is that, like any property, a home has a value that can evolve up or down, generating losses or gains.

In a balance sheet, your home will obviously be in the asset, the debt you incurred to buy it in the liability. Each year, your assets naturally increase (on average 8.75% per year for over 100 years) and your liabilities decrease thanks to your capital repayments. The end result of this is that your net asset increases each year, making you richer and richer.

It is not necessary, as Kiyosaki claims to be particularly inept, to wait for your debt to be repaid before your home becomes an asset.

It is finally time to return to the famous red phrase at the beginning of this article: The gross wealth of buyers stands at 265,000 euros, quite close to that of homeowners without loans, which reaches 285,600 euros, but very far from renters whose wealth amounts to 13,200 euros.

The hidden treasure of this phrase is as follows: in the end, it makes no difference to borrow money to buy your home (as the figures prove), and the reason is that, contrary to what Kiyosaki scandalously claims, the latter is an asset.

QED.

Here too, my article on the dramatic financial ignorance of those who spread Kiyosaki’s absurdity, because they do not understand basic accounting concepts, should help you understand the reasoning, and help you make better decisions between buying or renting.

10. It is better to invest in rental properties first before becoming a homeowner

Like the previous point, this is obviously not a valid argument in the debate between buying or renting, if you know how to analyze a balance sheet.

Because in reality, the opposite is exactly what happens: every month you rent, not only do you lose money, but you also reduce your borrowing capacity.

However, every month you repay your mortgage, not only do you increase your borrowing capacity, but you also ensure that your home can be used as additional collateral for purchasing your rental property.

This increases your leverage, as what you already have is used to secure and finance your other purchases.

Over the years, there are two simultaneous phenomena: the value of your property naturally increases (in France by 8.75% per year since 1900), and you gradually repay the capital you borrowed.

Therefore, your personal financial balance sheet shows a positive net balance that increases over time (increasing value, decreasing debt).

These are your personal net assets that are increasing.

This positive balance ensures that you can borrow to buy other properties.

This is how I was able to buy dozens of apartments without paying a penny in equity myself, since the properties already repaid (partially or totally) were ultimately used as collateral for the new ones.

It’s an extraordinary snowball effect that proves that money creates money.

It is sad to see once again that financial education is sorely lacking when reading or hearing the improbable number of false interpretations in the discussion between buying and renting.

Renting and investing in real estate to rent it out is therefore stupid in most cases (except for the exceptions listed below).

It puts the cart before the horse.

People who say these nonsense do not understand accounting theory.

11. It is better to rent because you sell your house every 7 years

The 7-year statistic, which corresponds to the average duration of property acquisition that many refer to from other sites, is misused.

This is the same mistake that wanders everywhere on the Internet by taking into account the famous statistics published by Boursorama (I think in 2009) and that almost all sites repeat without understanding what it really means.

In this case, when we look at the actual source and when we study how it was actually calculated, which few do, we learn that this famous average holding period includes landlords (those who rent) and speculators (those who buy to sell as quickly as possible), which means that the reasoning is statistically obviously incorrect.

A little common sense can help us: do you really know many people who sell their homes every 7 years in France?

No, right?

Me neither.

The reality for many French people is that they obviously stay in their homes for their entire lives, even for several generations with some families!

The real statistics now.

The exact average holding period of a homeowner seems difficult to find. To my knowledge, the only figure published on this (but it would be interesting if someone could find a more recent figure) is that of the General Commissariat for Sustainable Development in 2009: “Nearly 8% of homes changed occupants each year between 2005 and 2007. This rate varies from 3.5% among owners to 18% in the private rental stock.

In other words, the holding period of a homeowner of their primary residence is (1 divided by 0.035): 28 years and 7 months, and not 7 years as a donkey without thinking.

This, of course, completely changes the calculations.

Even for renters, who move according to this statistic on average every 5 years and 7 months (1 divided by 0.18), the point of profitability of ownership is in many cases extremely close for them in most of the French territory.

And anyway, all this actually has no influence on the reasoning, because if, I write well, an average homeowner sells their house after 28 years and 7 months, it is because they are on average close to retirement in the meantime, and therefore they are only enjoying it by buying others because their financial problems have been largely solved by their foresight.

Cases where renting your primary residence is more logical than buying

When it comes to choosing between buying or renting, it must be admitted that, in a very small minority of cases, some people have no advantage in accessing homeownership for various reasons.

Are you one of those people who should rent and not buy?

Here are four possible cases.

1. Poor credit rating

If your reputation with banks is compromised because you have previously had difficulties repaying your previous loans (consumer credit, car loan, etc.), it is not a good idea to want to borrow to buy your home.

2. High debt ratios

Lenders consider two ratios: front-end and back-end.

The front-end is your mortgage payment plus taxes and insurance divided by your monthly salary. This will be a maximum of 30%.

The back-end adds your other monthly debt payments to your mortgage repayment before dividing this total by your salary.

A debt ratio of 50% is a high ratio.

A high debt ratio means you may not qualify for the loan. Even if you find a unscrupulous lender who is willing to finance such a loan, you may not be able to pay your other living expenses, putting you in a pathetic situation.

3. Job instability or relocation

What is the level of security of your job? Is your job at risk? Is your company laying off? Could you be fired and, if so, how difficult would it be to get another job immediately?

Unemployment benefits are rarely sufficient to cover mortgage payments.

Are you likely to be transferred to another city in the next two or three years? If you sold due to a job transfer, your property would need at least 15% of the capital gain to cover the cost of the sale. Without it, you will lose money on the sale.

When buying a home, you should plan to stay put for a certain time.

4. Maintenance issues

All homes need maintenance.

Not everyone has the skills, and even less the desire, to tackle repair projects.

Moreover, many buyers cannot afford to hire a professional to fix things that break.

Experts suggest setting aside 5 percent of the purchase price to cover maintenance and repairs when buying a home.

So, only buy properties for which you will still have sufficient means to maintain them.

Who benefits from the crime?

The balance is therefore overwhelming for proponents of renting rather than buying.

So one wonders why France is the champion of the percentage of renters (40% of renters versus less than 30% in Europe)?

Why do so many sites and so-called financial experts promulgate so many lies?

Why do some people remain convinced of their view when all the figures prove them wrong?

I think there are three reasons:

1. I have already written: in France, there is a fatal lack of financial, tax, and accounting knowledge.

Far too many people do not understand and do not know how to use basic concepts such as inflation, compound interest, or interest rates, to name just a few fundamental factors in calculations.

These unfortunate people are obviously the first victims of the second reason:

2. I can only conclude and imagine that there is somewhere a mysterious and powerful lobby of rental property investors who spread false news through low-quality websites, social media, and so-called non-critical and reckless experts and journalists.

I am not a big supporter of silly theories of organized conspiracies, but how can I explain this improbable scam?

3. For the third reason, I asked June (my wife) if she knew why this was the case.

She generally has good judgment on these things.

According to her, it is because Kiyosaki was the first American personal finance book ever translated into French (more than 20 years ago), and since then it has been confused by all French bloggers as a financial bible.

She thinks I must be the first in France to relay the criticisms that are common in the United States in general and in academia in particular, and which have long since removed Kiyosaki from his pedestal, including bankruptcy.

She compares this to the same false study that is still used by opponents of vaccinations but still circulates through all sites, forums, and social media. With all the damage it causes.

She concluded by saying that for some, it must be terribly painful to admit that they were wrong, and that their ego takes a terrible hit.

There are people like that: when a lie is revealed, they refuse to see reality. They consciously choose to live in fantasy. The truth is simply repressed.

Personally, I have never had a problem admitting I was wrong.

Only fools do not change their minds.

Buying or renting: conclusion

It greatly disturbs me to see financial experts who are generally brilliant giving such bad advice when it comes to choosing between buying or renting.

I am not saying they are wrong on all the points they raise (sometimes rightly), but they focus solely on short-term aspects.

And one of the fundamental problems is the difference in appreciation of this: for many, the long term starts already in 5 or 10 years.

Not for me.

I believe that for such an important decision as accessing homeownership, it is not about around 5, 10, or even 20 years.

Buying or renting is a decision that commits you for life: not that you necessarily own a home for your entire life, but you must decide whether you want to build your ownwealth (and thus become rich), or finance someone else’s wealth (and thus remain poor).

I also invite you to carefully study the mirror effect of the choice between buying or renting: discover how a homeowner enriches themselves through their tenants by consulting my balance sheet of buying my first investment property.

If you are still reading here, it is probably because you agree with me.

Or, on the contrary, you think I am crazy for tying myself down.

I hope for you and your family, and for your future prosperity, that you are in the first case.

Finally, buying or renting is really a funny question.

For many people, a home is the largest purchase they have ever made, but it is not necessarily the most difficult.

So sign up for solid training to ensure that you do the right thing at every step of a real estate investment.

Investing in this training will certainly be the most profitable investment you will make in your entire life as a real estate investor.

Investing in real estate and becoming rich

Learn all the secrets of real estate hidden from the general public

NEW 2020: The 4 workarounds to the new 33% debt ratio rule.

Your comments

Anonymous, insulting comments, containing spam, false email addresses, links to commercial sites, or unrelated to the topic will be refused. Stay polite and read the article in its entirety before launching into criticisms that are most often encountered a little far.

Tag: rental real estate explained

Why Buy to Rent?