"Set and forget" Businesses ?

Autoblog, microniche website, domain and website flipping, though they're not 100% set and forget, but they're close, and it's not guaranteed you'll earn alot of money with them

alexismcbx said:

Hey guys,

Do you know any "set and forget" business models types ?

Click to expand...

i think set and forgot things only works with investment not with the business. But yah u can invest in someone else business and forget.

Biz Idea Lab said:

Buy a house and rent it out. Bes risk free investment ever!

Click to expand...

Worst idea ever.

(I'll do this in £ because I know more about the UK property market)

Take your £100k.

Buy house.

You now have a liability that's going to cost you a ton of money in upkeep.

Next.

Pay an agency to get someone to live in your property and have the agency manage it. I don't do property, but according to google it's 10-15% of your rent or a flat fee here in the UK.

So, £100k spent.

Now, £100k in most cities outside London will get you a small 1 bedroom flat in a less than desirable area of the city.

Rental on something like that is going to be between £350 per month if it's a dump to £550 per month if it's really quite nice. Generally it's going to be £425/mo. Let's call it £450 for rounder numbers.

Ok, so the agency will take about £50-£70 per month. So let's call your take home £400 per month.

Even if it stopped there, you'll have to wait 20 years to break even.

But that's not the reality.

There's initial costs to setup the flat for renting, so that has to be added to the bill.

Yearly maintenance will come in at £200 per year to £2k per year. It can vary. Some years it'll be bad. Over 20 years it's going to be quite significant. Boilers will need to be replaced, carpets, paint, damage, repairs, roofs, gardens, communal areas. Let's say £15k over 20 years, and it could be a LOT worse than this.

So, if you've rented out your flat, CONSTANTLY, for 15 years, which is incredibly unlikely, then you'll have made £72k, minus £15k repairs and you're in at £57k

Dumping your money in property sucks.

People think it's some magic pill.

Let's collaborate. You send money for the setup, I will do the setup and you simply forget!

No idea can ever be truly passive, everything and I mean EVERYTHING needs some kind of monitoring and efforts.

It could be as small as spending one hour every week but it will be required in some form or other, I believe we can still call this passive as you're spending 99% less time than your full-time job/business.

These ideas would include setting up a blog - spend a few months - turn it into an authority site and then it turns almost passive.
Write a book - promote it well - keep the sales raking in and then it turns almost passive.
Hire a dev - build a quality app - put money in ads and then it turns almost passive.
Buy a premium Instagram account - schedule content for 6 months - sell slots for a fee and then it turns almost passive.

As you can see, once the setup is ready and you're doing well, almost everything can be turned passive by hiring a VA or a manager to look after and you just take an update from them once every week.

You may temporarily set and forget a business and you may even make money from it but it never lasts in the end it will dry up slowly but surely. Been there done that.

splishsplash said:

Worst idea ever.

(I'll do this in £ because I know more about the UK property market)

Take your £100k.

Buy house.

You now have a liability that's going to cost you a ton of money in upkeep.

Next.

Pay an agency to get someone to live in your property and have the agency manage it. I don't do property, but according to google it's 10-15% of your rent or a flat fee here in the UK.

So, £100k spent.

Now, £100k in most cities outside London will get you a small 1 bedroom flat in a less than desirable area of the city.

Rental on something like that is going to be between £350 per month if it's a dump to £550 per month if it's really quite nice. Generally it's going to be £425/mo. Let's call it £450 for rounder numbers.

Ok, so the agency will take about £50-£70 per month. So let's call your take home £400 per month.

Even if it stopped there, you'll have to wait 20 years to break even.

But that's not the reality.

There's initial costs to setup the flat for renting, so that has to be added to the bill.

Yearly maintenance will come in at £200 per year to £2k per year. It can vary. Some years it'll be bad. Over 20 years it's going to be quite significant. Boilers will need to be replaced, carpets, paint, damage, repairs, roofs, gardens, communal areas. Let's say £15k over 20 years, and it could be a LOT worse than this.

So, if you've rented out your flat, CONSTANTLY, for 15 years, which is incredibly unlikely, then you'll have made £72k, minus £15k repairs and you're in at £57k

Dumping your money in property sucks.

People think it's some magic pill.

Click to expand...

Missed out an important bit.

You're house you paid £100,000 for could easily be worth £140-£180,000 if you hold on to it for 15 years.

So you could easily have doubled you money. I agree with you general point though better investments available.

goose1234 said:

Missed out an important bit.

You're house you paid £100,000 for could easily be worth £140-£180,000 if you hold on to it for 15 years.

So you could easily have doubled you money. I agree with you general point though better investments available.

Click to expand...

Could is the operative word

It could also be worth £70k.

Depends when you bought it and the state of the economy.

If you hold onto it for long enough it'll go up. Like 50 years.

15 years, probably, but it's not necessarily going to double in value, and you have to take inflation into account. If it's worth £140k in 20 years, then that's not like £140k in today's money.

Property really isn't a good investment.


If you invested £100k into the stockmarket over 20 years and compounded it. Which means, you just keep it there. Your $100k would be worth £732k in 20 years at the 10% return average. Even at 7% it would be worth £404k

If you invested the £100k into the stockmarket, and instead of an average of say £50/mo in costs to maintain your property, you put that into the stockmarket, then in 20 years you would have :-

£771k

If you invested £200/mo for 20 years into the stockmarket on top of that your net worth would be £886k.

If you want £1.5 mil, then invest £100k and £1000/mo for 20 years and you'll have £1.5mil in 20 years.

Pretty fucking simple. Most people don't do it. They spend their money on utter crap, or a fucking house.

A house a LIABILITY!

But people want "security" so the feeling of "owning" a home gives them that, when in reality, it's not security, since you can go and get a roof over your head for very little rent if you'd just not been over-spending your entire life and had put the money in the stockmarket instead of the bank.

This is just following an index. Not any fancy investing, which is pointless anyway. The best investors in the world only make 20% over a long period. But 20% is fucking huge. If you can make 20% over 20 years your £100k + £1k/mo will be worth £8.5 million. If you can invest £5k/mo on top of that, you'll be worth £21 million!

Make it an initial £500k and £15k/mo for 20 years and you're worth £74 million in 20 years.

many good infos in this thread

splishsplash said:

Could is the operative word

It could also be worth £70k.

Depends when you bought it and the state of the economy.

If you hold onto it for long enough it'll go up. Like 50 years.

15 years, probably, but it's not necessarily going to double in value, and you have to take inflation into account. If it's worth £140k in 20 years, then that's not like £140k in today's money.

Property really isn't a good investment.

Click to expand...

Average house has risen by over 200% in the UK in the last 20 years so even taking inflation in to account has been a pretty good investment.

Invest in crypto

goose1234 said:

Average house has risen by over 200% in the UK in the last 20 years so even taking inflation in to account has been a pretty good investment.

Click to expand...

https://www.allagents.co.uk/house-prices-adjusted/
We had a bubble.

Take a look at 1975 to 1995 $89k to $98k

What about if you bought in '79 at $105, then in '95 it's worth $98k.

This isn't uniform yearly growth. It went up, down, up, down, then there was a bubble that burst and it's doing the same again, ups and downs. If there's another bubble it'll be even worse.

Now look at the s&p500

https://www.macrotrends.net/2324/sp-500-historical-chart-data
crash of '29 dropped then recovered.

'65 to '82 was bad, but the s&p500 actually made 6.8% over that time with dividends.

The rest is steady growth.

Much safer than property. Property is just bricks. The s&p500 is the top companies in the economy. They are growing. They are innovating. As long as the world is expanding, the s&p500 is expanding with it.

Property does NOT expand. It's a liability. It just ages. Why does it go up in value? Think about it..

Bubbles. People trying to make fast money. Taking loans they shouldn't. Research the 2008 crash and understand why it went all wrong. sub-prime mortgages. It was because of property.

Why would a house built in 2020 be worth $14.5 million in 2070? $100k compounded for 50 years in the s&p500 will be worth around that. A house? Why? It should just keep pace with inflation.

They will only increase in value if there's a shortage of homes. If more people are richer and buying homes, then they will increase, BUT, this also causes inflation to increase, since more people are richer, more people are buying. Things are worth LESS. supply and demand. Economics.

Property sucks

Misan Kumar said:

check this out
https://incomeschool.com/project24/

Click to expand...

it is not set and forget it is a lot of work, the same nature to any business.

ilhivy said:

it is not set and forget it is a lot of work, the same nature to any business.

Click to expand...

That's what makes it set/initial work....
nothing comes without work btw

ETFs.

Misan Kumar said:

That's what makes it set/initial work....
nothing comes without work btw

Click to expand...

you can open a restaurant, then hire people to manage. It is the same 'set and go concept' as having a blog...it is about the mindset of the owner, if he wants to always be involved, then it is never 'set and go'. The true exception is being a professional or craftsman, eg lawyer, painter, handyman. If these professionals run it as a consultancy service/labor work then it is never set and go as the skill is with them. But if they run it as a business, they can still hire out and shift the trust from themselves to the hired representatives. 'set and go' law firm for the boss.

Adsense can be categorized as passive income too.

I dont think they could work that good, the best thing to do its to set it up, and leave someone in charge for a % of the revenue.

Buying raw land and selling it on contract is pretty good too, and if the buyer defaults you keep the land. I've done this successfully.
Only caveat is taxes which affects all of these ideas. There is a finite amount of useable land, and an exponentially growing population.
Like the old saying goes, nobody is making more land, it's actually shrinking with rising oceans. The Saudis are trying to make more with very limited success.

Youtube is eternal monetization, you just need to get the required number of views and subscribers in order to open it. And of course, make quality content that will always be in demand. From ideas that immediately come to mind. For example,education and training of children, or how to understand that you definitely do not have schizophrenia, something in this direction