Podcasts about OPM

Federal employees, on average, are waiting longer to see their retirement applications processed. New data from the Office of Personnel Management for August shows it takes an average of 70 days to process a claim from a retiring fed. But if retirement claims are coming to OPM in less than 60 days, those cases take, on average, 45 days to complete. At the same time, OPM received more than 9,400 retirement claims last month. OPM's backlog of retirement claims dropped by 2,000 to 24,300. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Greg Hogan is out as the chief information officer of the Office of Personnel Management after roughly seven-and-a-half months on the job. Hogan was installed at the human capital agency on the first day of President Donald Trump's second administration, replacing Melvin Brown II after roughly a week on the job. According to an OPM spokeswoman, Hogan departed the agency earlier this week and Perryn Ashmore, who is currently assistant director of enterprise learning at the agency, is currently serving as CIO in an acting capacity. Although not much was shared by the agency about Hogan's background, a legal filing in a challenge brought by current and former federal employees over Department of Government Efficiency access to OPM data provided some details. According to that document, Hogan was the vice president of infrastructure at comma.ai — a self-driving car software company — before joining the Trump administration. He also told the court he had 20 years of experience in private sector IT and a computer engineering degree. Stephen Ehikian, the deputy administrator of the General Services Administration, has left the agency to take over as chief executive officer at the enterprise AI application software company C3 AI. Ehikian told GSA staff Tuesday in an email obtained by FedScoop that he would “transition out” of the agency's deputy administrator role, but remain an adviser to the leadership team during the transition process. On Wednesday, C3 AI announced Ehikian's hiring as CEO. He said in a statement he is “honored” to join the company “at such a pivotal time in the AI era.” He served as the GSA's acting head for the first half of this year until July, when President Donald Trump tapped State Department leader Michael Rigas for the role and Ehikian moved into the deputy spot. “I want to thank Stephen Ehikian for his service and wish him well,” Rigas said in a statement shared by GSA. Edward Forst, a longtime financial services executive, was nominated by Trump in July to serve as the next administrator of the GSA. A nomination hearing date has not been scheduled, according to congressional records. The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every Monday-Friday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast  on Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud, Spotify and YouTube.

The federal workforce is shrinking fast—OPM says 300,000 fewer employees are on the rolls compared to last year. Agencies are bracing for a retirement wave and some are cutting bargaining rights. Congress is heading toward a budget showdown with a continuing resolution almost guaranteed. What does all this mean for the people who keep government running? John Hatton, staff vice president at NARFE. joins me to break it all down.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

A year after launching the Postal Service Health Benefits Program, the Office of Personnel Management is facing critical resource shortfalls that threaten its ability to sustain operations. An Inspector General audit warns that without urgent staffing and funding fixes, OPM may struggle to process enrollments, manage benefits, and maintain service for more than 800,000 postal employees and retirees during the 2025 open season. Here to explain what's at stake is the Group Chief, Community-Rated Audits Group, OPM Office of the Inspector General ,Matthew Knupp.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This session shares the Police Station Building Cmte Mtg held on Wednesday, August 27, 2025. One member (G Premo) was absent. Quick recap:Joe Lynch, Owner Project Manager, (OPM) provides an overview, then the other members of the team walk through the presentation doc shared hereStarting with 200 in Franklin they whittled down to 36, then to 8, then finally to 2; Davis Thayer and ParmenterCompiled the listing of deficiencies and needs for the current and future department operations, lead to preliminary building design requirementsIn turn, these requirements lead to initial placement on the final 2 sites (DT & Parmenter) and a discussion on the pros and cons of eachAn initial estimation of the building cost and total project cost was provided. For Parmenter site it could be about $48M, the DT site would be more as it would also require demolition of the existing building and that was not calculated at the timeNext steps were outlinedopen houses scheduled for the community to view the existing facility on 911 Panther WayTours of 3 recent police buildings done for other communities are being scheduled for the CommitteeNext meeting scheduled for Oct 27 at Council ChambersSite selection is likely to be either at that meeting or the next one in order for the remainder of the project timeline to continue to move forward (i.e. more detailed design, and cost estimations, etc.)The recording runs about 1 hour & 30 minutes--------------Franklin TV video is available for replay -> https://www.youtube.com/live/EWVb7O-b_ag?&t=67 Meeting agenda -> https://core-docs.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/documents/asset/uploaded_file/4780/FPSD/5979277/SCAGENDA_8-26-25.pdf Meeting packet folder (items released for the meeting, in some cases posted a day or two after the meeting) -> https://www.franklinps.net/documents/departments/school-committee/meeting-packets/2025---26-meeting-packets/august-26%2C-2025-sc-meeting-packet/846929 My full set of notes in one PDF -> https://drive.google.com/file/d/14VB3GuDdCAG-U80a3pT3nIp5GSZZhUSJ/view?usp=drive_link -------------We are now producing this in collaboration with Franklin.TV and Franklin Public Radio (wfpr.fm) or 102.9 on the Franklin area radio dial. This podcast is my public service effort for Franklin but we can't do it alone. We can always use your help.How can you help?If you can use the information that you find here, please tell your friends and neighborsIf you don't like something here, please let me knowAnd if you have interest in reporting on meetings or events, please reach out. We'll share and show you what and how we do what we doThrough this feedback loop we can continue to make improvements. I thank you for listening.For additional information, please visit

The Office of Personnel Management is taking on some big changes this year, like trying to modernize the Federal Retirement System, improve health insurance programs for federal employees, and overhaul the hiring process. But as OPM undertakes those major efforts, the agency is on track to lose 1000 employees, a third of its total workforce by the end of the year. As part of our Workforce Reimagined event Federal News Network's Drew Friedman, got more from OPM Director Scott Kupor. Here's a segment of their conversation.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In This Episode What separates a company that grows sustainably from one that stalls out? According to Juan DeAngulo, it's all about process. In this engaging conversation with host Adi Klevit, Juan shares how structured systems transform founder-dependent sales into scalable, repeatable growth. Juan reflects on his entrepreneurial journey, including scaling a real estate investment firm and attending Harvard Business School's OPM program, where he realized his passion for building structured organizations. He then dives into the creation of Inselligence, explaining how its proprietary algorithms plug into CRMs to deliver insights that help businesses identify bottlenecks, segment pipelines, and improve sales and marketing alignment. Throughout the interview, Juan and Adi emphasize the power of process in sales—from documenting superstar behaviors to designing workflows that managers and teams can actually follow. They highlight how data-backed systems not only increase efficiency but also empower people, making companies stronger, more predictable, and ultimately more scalable.  

Tamang SPOILER-FREE na tambay lang in our Season 7 premiere! As if that means anything! LDR podcasting pa rin tayo and we divided and conquered the TV and film space—meaning, kanya-kanya lang kami ng mga pinanood. First up, Mike tells us about the biggest movie in Korea right now, My Daughter is a Zombie. Matakot, matawa, or maiyak, bahala na kayo. Ham then tells us about another—yes, another—Pedro Pascal film, the COVID black comedy, Eddington. Mike then goes on to ramble about his Netflix binge headlined by Marla Ancheta's OPM musical, One Hit Wonder. Dagdag mo na dyan ang The Last Goodbye with Matt Lozano and Daniela Stranner, Isolated with Yassi Pressman, Night Always Comes with Vanessa Kirby, and the German erotic thriller, Fall for Me. Ham then tells us about Mike Flannagan's inspiring life drama, The Life of Chuck with Tom Hiddleston. And to top it all off, Mike talks about Dave Franco and Alison Brie in the body horror film, Together! Welcome to Please Pause Season 7!Follow us on Instagram, Threads, Facebook, Twitter, Tiktok, and Letterboxd @pleasepausephWe'd really appreciate it if you tell someone about the podcast! Thank you for supporting Please Pause!

The top lawmakers on a key House cybersecurity panel are hoping to remove a barrier to entry for cyber jobs in the federal government. Introduced last week, the Cybersecurity Hiring Modernization Act from Reps. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., and Shontel Brown, D-Ohio, would prioritize skills-based hiring over educational requirements for cyber jobs at federal agencies. Mace and Brown — the chair and ranking member of the House Oversight Cybersecurity, Information Technology, and Government Innovation Subcommittee, respectively — said the legislation would ensure the federal government has access to a “broader pool of qualified applicants” as the country faces “urgent cybersecurity challenges.” Mace said in a press release Thursday: “As cyber threats against our government continue to grow, we need to make sure our federal agencies hire the most qualified candidates, not just those with traditional degrees. This bill cuts red tape, opens doors to skilled Americans without a four-year diploma but with the expertise to get the job done, and strengthens our nation's cybersecurity workforce.” Brown said in a statement that expanding the cyber workforce is “imperative” to “meet our nation's growing need for safe and secure systems.” The bill aims to “remove outdated hiring policies, expand workforce opportunities to a wider pool of talented applicants, and help agencies hire the staff that they need,” she added. The bill calls on the Office of Personnel Management to annually publish any education-related changes that are made to minimum qualification requirements for federal cyber roles. OPM would also be charged with aggregating data on educational backgrounds of new hires for those cyber positions. Texas-based defense startup Saronic Technologies will produce multiple batches of autonomous maritime drones for the U.S. Navy by mid-2031 under an other transaction agreement (OTA) worth more than $392 million, according to officials and public contracting documents viewed by DefenseScoop. Details are sparse regarding the specific features, types and quantities of unmanned vessels Saronic will deliver — but they'll likely mark a major component of the Navy's AI-enabled, hybrid fleet that's being designed to counter security threats in and around the Pacific. OTA contract vehicles offer Defense Department buyers more flexibility and speed than traditional Federal Acquisition Regulation-based acquisitions. They're a key element in the Navy's broader plan to modernize and incentivize accelerated technology adoption to prepare for future fights. According to records posted on the Federal Procurement Data System, Naval Sea Systems Command and Saronic Technologies formalized this $392 million OTA — which has a completion date of May 30, 2031 — on May 16. Two months later, in July, NAVSEA made an award to Saronic worth nearly $197 million under the agreement, or about half of the total award ceiling. It's unclear if more awards have been made to date.

Today I'm talking to economic historian Judge Glock, Director of Research at the Manhattan Institute. Judge works on a lot of topics: if you enjoy this episode, I'd encourage you to read some of his work on housing markets and the Environmental Protection Agency. But I cornered him today to talk about civil service reform.Since the 1990s, over 20 red and blue states have made radical changes to how they hire and fire government employees — changes that would be completely outside the Overton window at the federal level. A paper by Judge and Renu Mukherjee lists four reforms made by states like Texas, Florida, and Georgia: * At-will employment for state workers* The elimination of collective bargaining agreements* Giving managers much more discretion to hire* Giving managers much more discretion in how they pay employeesJudge finds decent evidence that the reforms have improved the effectiveness of state governments, and little evidence of the politicization that federal reformers fear. Meanwhile, in Washington, managers can't see applicants' resumes, keyword searches determine who gets hired, and firing a bad performer can take years. But almost none of these ideas are on the table in Washington.Thanks to Harry Fletcher-Wood for his judicious transcript edits and fact-checking, and to Katerina Barton for audio edits.Judge, you have a paper out about lessons for civil service reform from the states. Since the ‘90s, red and blue states have made big changes to how they hire and fire people. Walk through those changes for me.I was born and grew up in Washington DC, heard a lot about civil service throughout my childhood, and began to research it as an adult. But I knew almost nothing about the state civil service systems. When I began working in the states — mainly across the Sunbelt, including in Texas, Kansas, Arizona — I was surprised to learn that their civil service systems were reformed to an absolutely radical extent relative to anything proposed at the federal level, let alone implemented.Starting in the 1990s, several states went to complete at-will employment. That means there were no official civil service protections for any state employees. Some managers were authorized to hire people off the street, just like you could in the private sector. A manager meets someone in a coffee shop, they say, "I'm looking for exactly your role. Why don't you come on board?" At the federal level, with its stultified hiring process, it seemed absurd to even suggest something like that.You had states that got rid of any collective bargaining agreements with their public employee unions. You also had states that did a lot more broadbanding [creating wider pay bands] for employee pay: a lot more discretion for managers to reward or penalize their employees depending on their performance.These major reforms in these states were, from the perspective of DC, incredibly radical. Literally nobody at the federal level proposes anything approximating what has been in place for decades in the states. That should be more commonly known, and should infiltrate the debate on civil service reform in DC.Even though the evidence is not absolutely airtight, on the whole these reforms have been positive. A lot of the evidence is surveys asking managers and operators in these states how they think it works. They've generally been positive. We know these states operate pretty well: Places like Texas, Florida, and Arizona rank well on state capacity metrics in terms of cost of government, time for permitting, and other issues.Finally, to me the most surprising thing is the dog that didn't bark. The argument in the federal government against civil service reform is, “If you do this, we will open up the gates of hell and return to the 19th-century patronage system, where spoilsmen come and go depending on elected officials, and the government is overrun with political appointees who don't care about the civil service.” That has simply not happened. We have very few reports of any concrete examples of politicization at the state level. In surveys, state employees and managers can almost never remember any example of political preferences influencing hiring or firing.One of the surveys you cited asked, “Can you think of a time someone said that they thought that the political preferences were a factor in civil service hiring?” and it was something like 5%.It was in that 5-10% range. I don't think you'd find a dissimilar number of people who would say that even in an official civil service system. Politics is not completely excluded even from a formal civil service system.A few weeks ago, you and I talked to our mutual friend, Don Moynihan, who's a scholar of public administration. He's more skeptical about the evidence that civil service reform would be positive at the federal level.One of your points is, “We don't have strong negative evidence from the states. Productivity didn't crater in states that moved to an at-will employment system.” We do have strong evidence that collective bargaining in the public sector is bad for productivity.What I think you and Don would agree on is that we could use more evidence on the hiring and firing side than the surveys that we have. Is that a fair assessment?Yes, I think that's correct. As you mentioned, the evidence on collective bargaining is pretty close to universal: it raises costs, reduces the efficiency of government, and has few to no positive upsides.On hiring and firing, I mentioned a few studies. There's a 2013 study that looks at HR managers in six states and finds very little evidence of politicization, and managers generally prefer the new system. There was a dissertation that surveyed several employees and managers in civil service reform and non-reform states. Across the board, the at-will employment states said they had better hiring retention, productivity, and so forth. And there's a 2002 study that looked specifically at Texas, Florida, and Georgia after their reforms, and found almost universal approbation inside the civil service itself for these reforms.These are not randomized control trials. But I think that generally positive evidence should point us directionally where we should go on civil service reform. If we loosen restrictions on discipline and firing, decentralize hiring and so forth — we probably get some productivity benefits from it. We can also know, with some amount of confidence, that the sky is not going to fall, which I think is a very important baseline assumption. The civil service system will continue on and probably be fairly close to what it is today, in terms of its political influence, if you have decentralized hiring and at-will employment.As you point out, a lot of these reforms that have happened in 20-odd states since the ‘90s would be totally outside the Overton window at the federal level. Why is it so easy for Georgia to make a bipartisan move in the ‘90s to at-will employment, when you couldn't raise the topic at the federal level?It's a good question. I think in the 1990s, a lot of people thought a combination of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act — which was the Carter-era act that somewhat attempted to do what these states hoped to do in the 1990s — and the Clinton-era Reinventing Government Initiative, would accomplish the same ends. That didn't happen.That was an era when civil service reform was much more bipartisan. In Georgia, it was a Democratic governor, Zell Miller, who pushed it. In a lot of these other states, they got buy-in from both sides. The recent era of state reform took place after the 2010 Republican wave in the states. Since that wave, the reform impetus for civil service has been much more Republican. That has meant it's been a lot harder to get buy-in from both sides at the federal level, which will be necessary to overcome a filibuster.I think people know it has to be very bipartisan. We're just past the point, at least at the moment, where it can be bipartisan at the federal level. But there are areas where there's a fair amount of overlap between the two sides on what needs to happen, at least in the upper reaches of the civil service.It was interesting to me just how bipartisan civil service reform has been at various times. You talked about the Civil Service Reform Act, which passed Congress in 1978. President Carter tells Congress that the civil service system:“Has become a bureaucratic maze which neglects merit, tolerates poor performance, permits abuse of legitimate employee rights, and mires every personnel action in red tape, delay, and confusion.”That's a Democratic president saying that. It's striking to me that the civil service was not the polarized topic that it is today.Absolutely. Carter was a big civil service reformer in Georgia before those even larger 1990s reforms. He campaigned on civil service reform and thought it was essential to the success of his presidency. But I think you are seeing little sprouts of potential bipartisanship today, like the Chance to Compete Act at the end of 2024, and some of the reforms Obama did to the hiring process. There's options for bipartisanship at the federal level, even if it can't approach what the states have done.I want to walk through the federal hiring process. Let's say you're looking to hire in some federal agency — you pick the agency — and I graduated college recently, and I want to go into the civil service. Tell me about trying to hire somebody like me. What's your first step?It's interesting you bring up the college graduate, because that is one recent reform: President Trump put out an executive order trying to counsel agencies to remove the college degree requirement for job postings. This happened in a lot of states first, like Maryland, and that's also been bipartisan. This requirement for a college degree — which was used as a very unfortunate proxy for ability at a lot of these jobs — is now being removed. It's not across the whole federal government. There's still job postings that require higher education degrees, but that's something that's changed.To your question, let's say the Department of Transportation. That's one of the more bipartisan ones, when you look at surveys of federal civil servants. Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs, they tend to be a little more Republican. Health and Human Services and some other agencies tend to be pretty Democrat. Transportation is somewhere in the middle.As a manager, you try to craft a job description and posting to go up on the USA Jobs website, which is where all federal job postings go. When they created it back in 1996, that was supposedly a massive reform to federal hiring: this website where people could submit their resumes. Then, people submit their resumes and answer questions about their qualifications for the job.One of the slightly different aspects from the private sector is that those applications usually go to an HR specialist first. The specialist reviews everything and starts to rank people into different categories, based on a lot of weird things. It's supposed to be “knowledge, skills, and abilities” — your KSAs, or competencies. To some extent, this is a big step up from historical practice. You had, frankly, an absurd civil service exam, where people had to fill out questions about, say, General Grant or about US Code Title 42, or whatever it was, and then submit it. Someone rated the civil service exam, and then the top three test-takers were eligible for the job.We have this newer, better system, where we rank on knowledge, skills, and abilities, and HR puts put people into different categories. One of the awkward ways they do this is by merely scanning the resumes and applications for keywords. If it's a computer job, make sure you say the word “computer” somewhere in your resume. Make sure you say “manager” if it's a managerial job.Just to be clear, this is entirely literal. There's a keyword search, and folks who don't pass that search are dinged.Yes. I've always wondered, how common is this? It's sometimes hard to know what happens in the black box in these federal HR departments. I saw an HR official recently say, "If I'm not allowed to do keyword searches, I'm going to take 15 years to overlook all the applications, so I've got to do keyword searches." If they don't have the keywords, into the circular file it goes, as they used to say: into the garbage can.Then they start ranking people on their abilities into, often, three different categories. That is also very literal. If you put in the little word bubble, "I am an exceptional manager," you get pushed on into the next level of the competition. If you say, "I'm pretty good, but I'm not the best," into the circular file you go.I've gotten jaded about this, but it really is shocking. We ask candidates for a self-assessment, and if they just rank themselves 10/10 on everything, no matter how ludicrous, that improves their odds of being hired.That's going to immensely improve your odds. Similar to the keyword search, there's been pushback on this in recent years, and I'm definitely not going to say it's universal anymore. It's rarer than it used to be. But it's still a very common process.The historical civil service system used to operate on a rule of three. In places like New York, it still operates like that. The top three candidates on the evaluation system get presented to the manager, and the manager has to approve one of them for the position.Thanks partially to reforms by the Obama administration in 2010, they have this category rating system where the best qualified or the very qualified get put into a big bucket together [instead of only including the top three]. Those are the people that the person doing the hiring gets to see, evaluate, and decide who he wants to hire.There are some restrictions on that. If a veteran outranks everybody else, you've got to pick the veteran [typically known as Veterans' Preference]. That was an issue in some of the state civil service reforms, too. The states said, “We're just going to encourage a veterans' preference. We don't need a formalized system to say they get X number of points and have to be in Y category. We're just going to say, ‘Try to hire veterans.'” That's possible without the formal system, despite what some opponents of reform may claim.One of the particular problems here is just the nature of the people doing the hiring. Sometimes you just need good managers to encourage HR departments to look at a broader set of qualifications. But one of the bigger problems is that they keep the HR evaluation system divorced from the manager who is doing the hiring. David Shulkin, who was the head of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), wrote a great book, It Shouldn't Be This Hard to Serve Your Country. He was a healthcare exec, and the VA is mainly a healthcare agency. He would tell people, "You should work for me," they would send their applications into the HR void, and he'd never see them again. They would get blocked at some point in this HR evaluation process, and he'd be sent people with no healthcare experience, because for whatever reason they did well in the ranking.One of the very base-level reforms should be, “How can we more clearly integrate the hiring manager with the evaluation process?” To some extent, the bipartisan Chance to Compete Act tries to do this. They said, “You should have subject matter experts who are part of crafting the description of the job, are part of evaluating, and so forth.” But there's still a long road to go.Does that firewall — where the person who wants to hire doesn't get to look at the process until the end — exist originally because of concerns about cronyism?One of the interesting things about the civil service is its raison d'être — its reason for being — was supposedly a single, clear purpose: to prevent politicized hiring and patronage. That goes back to the Pendleton Civil Service Act of 1883. But it's always been a little strange that you have all of these very complex rules about every step of the process — from hiring to firing to promotion, and everything in between — to prevent political influence. We could just focus on preventing political influence, and not regulate every step of the process on the off-chance that without a clear regulation, political influence could creep in. This division [between hiring manager and applicants] is part of that general concern. There are areas where I've heard HR specialists say, "We declare that a manager is a subject matter expert, and we bring them into the process early on, we can do that." But still the division is pretty stark, and it's based on this excessive concern about patronage.One point you flag is that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which is the body that thinks about personnel in the federal government, has a 300-page regulatory document for agencies on how you have to hire. There's a remarkable amount of process.Yes, but even that is a big change from the Federal Personnel Manual, which was the 10,000-page document that we shredded in the 1990s. In the ‘90s, OPM gave the agencies what's called “delegated examining authorities.” This says, “You, agency, have power to decide who to hire, we're not going to do the central supervision anymore. But, but, but: here's the 300-page document that dictates exactly how you have to carry out that hiring.”So we have some decentralization, allowing managers more authority to control their own departments. But this two-level oversight — a local HR department that's ultimately being overseen by the OPM — also leads to a lot of slip ‘twixt cup and lip, in terms of how something gets implemented. If you're in the agency and you're concerned about the OPM overseeing your process, you're likely to be much more careful than you would like to be. “Yes, it's delegated to me, but ultimately, I know I have to answer to OPM about this process. I'm just going to color within the lines.”I often cite Texas, which has no central HR office. Each agency decides how it wants to hire. In a lot of these reform states, if there is a central personnel office, it's an information clearinghouse or reservoir of models. “You can use us, the central HR office, as a resource if you want us to help you post the job, evaluate it, or help manage your processes, but you don't have to.” That's the goal we should be striving for in a lot of the federal reforms. Just make OPM a resource for the managers in the individual departments to do their thing or go independent.Let's say I somehow get through the hiring process. You offer me a job at the Department of Transportation. What are you paying me?This is one of the more stultified aspects of the federal civil service system. OPM has another multi-hundred-page handbook called the Handbook of Occupational Groups and Families. Inside that, you've got 49 different “groups and families,” like “Clerical occupations.” Inside those 49 groups are a series of jobs, sometimes dozens, like “Computer Operator.” Inside those, they have independent documents — often themselves dozens of pages long — detailing classes of positions. Then you as a manager have to evaluate these nine factors, which can each give points to each position, which decides how you get slotted into this weird Government Schedule (GS) system [the federal payscale].Again, this is actually an improvement. Before, you used to have the Civil Service Commission, which went around staring very closely at someone over their typewriter and saying, "No, I think you should be a GS-12, not a GS-11, because someone over in the Department of Defense who does your same job is a GS-12." Now this is delegated to agencies, but again, the agencies have to listen to the OPM on how to classify and set their jobs into this 15-stage GS-classification system, each stage of which has 10 steps which determine your pay, and those steps are determined mainly by your seniority. It's a formalized step-by-step system, overwhelmingly based on just how long you've sat at your desk.Let's be optimistic about my performance as a civil servant. Say that over my first three years, I'm just hitting it out of the park. Can you give me a raise? What can you do to keep me in my role?Not too much. For most people, the within-step increases — those 10 steps inside each GS-level — is just set by seniority. Now there are all these quality step increases you can get, but they're very rare and they have to be documented. So you could hypothetically pay someone more, but it's going to be tough. In general, the managers just prefer to stick to seniority, because not sticking to it garners a lot of complaints. Like so much else, the goal is, "We don't want someone rewarding an official because they happen to share their political preferences." The result of that concern is basically nobody can get rewarded at all, which is very unfortunate.We do have examples in state and federal government of what's known as broadbanding, where you have very broad pay scales, and the manager can decide where to slot someone. Say you're a computer operator, which can mean someone who knows what an Excel spreadsheet is, or someone who's programming the most advanced AI systems. As a manager in South Carolina or Florida, you have a lot of discretion to say, "I can set you 50% above the market rate of what this job technically would go for, if I think you're doing a great job."That's very rare at the federal level. They've done broadbanding at the Government Accountability Office, the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The China Lake Experiment out in California gave managers a lot more discretion to reward scientists. But that's definitely the exception. In general, it's a step-wise, seniority-based system.What if you want to bring me into the Senior Executive Service (SES)? Theoretically, that sits at the top of the General Service scale. Can't you bump me up in there and pay me what you owe me?I could hypothetically bring you in as a senior executive servant. The SES was created in the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act. The idea was, “We're going to have this elite cadre of about 8,000 individuals at the top of the federal government, whose employment will be higher-risk and higher-reward. They might be fired, and we're going to give them higher pay to compensate for that.”Almost immediately, that did not work out. Congress was outraged at the higher pay given to the top officials and capped it. Ever since, how much the SES can get paid has been tightly controlled. As in most of the rest of the federal government, where they establish these performance pay incentives or bonuses — which do exist — they spread them like peanut butter over the whole service. To forestall complaints, everyone gets a little bit every two or three years.That's basically what happened to the SES. Their annual pay is capped at the vice president's salary, which is a cap for a lot of people in the federal government. For most of your GS and other executive scales, the cap is Congress's salary. [NB: This is no longer exactly true, since Congress froze its own salaries in 2009. The cap for GS (currently about $195k) is now above congressional salaries ($174k).]One of the big problems with pay in the federal government is pay compression. Across civil service systems, the highest-skilled people tend to be paid much less than the private sector, and the lowest-skilled people tend to get paid much more. The political science reason for that is pretty simple: the median voter in America still decides what seems reasonable. To the median voter, the average salary of a janitor looks low, and the average salary of a scientist looks way too high. Hence this tendency to pay compression. Your average federal employee is probably overpaid relative to the private sector, because the lowest-skilled employees are paid up to 40% higher than the private sector equivalent. The highest-paid employees, the post-graduate skilled professionals, are paid less. That makes it hard to recruit the top performers, but it also swells the wage budget in a way that makes it difficult to talk about reform.There's a lot of interest in this administration in making it easier to recruit talent and get rid of under-performers. There have been aggressive pushes to limit collective bargaining in the public sector. That should theoretically make it easier to recruit, but it also increases the precariousness of civil service roles. We've seen huge firings in the civil service over the last six months.Classically, the explicit trade-off of working in the federal government was, “Your pay is going to be capped, but you have this job for life. It's impossible to get rid of you.” You trade some lifetime earnings for stability. In a world where the stability is gone, but pay is still capped, isn't the net effect to drive talent away from the civil service?I think it's a concern now. On one level it should be ameliorated, because those who are most concerned with stability of employment do tend to be lower performers. If you have people who are leaving the federal service because all they want is stability, and they're not getting that anymore, that may not be a net loss. As someone who came out of academia and knows the wonder of effective lifetime annuities, there can be very high performers who like that stability who therefore take a lower salary. Without the ability to bump that pay up more, it's going to be an issue.I do know that, internally, the Trump administration has made some signs they're open to reforms in the top tiers of the SES and other parts of the federal government. They would be willing to have people get paid more at that level to compensate for the increased risks since the Trump administration came in. But when you look at the reductions in force (RIFs) that have happened under Trump, they are overwhelmingly among probationary employees, the lower-level employees.With some exceptions. If you've been promoted recently, you can get reclassified as probationary, so some high-performers got lumped in.Absolutely. The issue has been exacerbated precisely because the RIF regulations that are in place have made the firings particularly damaging. If you had a more streamlined RIF system — which they do have in many states, where seniority is not the main determinant of who gets laid off — these RIFs could be removing the lower-performing civil servants and keeping the higher-performing ones, and giving them some amount of confidence in their tenure.Unfortunately, the combination of large-scale removals with the existing RIF regs, which are very stringent, has demoralized some of the upper levels of the federal government. I share that concern. But I might add, it is interesting, if you look at the federal government's own figures on the total civil service workforce, they have gone down significantly since Trump came in office, but I think less than 100,000 still, in the most recent numbers that I've seen. I'm not sure how much to trust those, versus some of these other numbers where people have said 150,000, 200,000.Whether the Trump administration or a future administration can remove large numbers of people from the civil service should be somewhat divorced from the general conversation on civil service reform. The main debate about whether or not Trump can do this centers around how much power the appropriators in Congress have to determine the total amount of spending in particular agencies on their workforce. It does not depend necessarily on, "If we're going to remove people — whether for general layoffs, or reductions in force, or because of particular performance issues — how can we go about doing that?" My last-ditch hope to maintain a bipartisan possibility of civil service reform is to bracket, “How much power does the president have to remove or limit the workforce in general?” from “How can he go about hiring and firing, et cetera?”I think making it easier for the president to identify and remove poor performers is a tool that any future administration would like to have.We had this conversation sparked again with the firing of the Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner. But that was a position Congress set up to be appointed by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and removable by the President. It's a separate issue from civil service at large. Everyone said, “We want the president to be able to hire and fire the commissioner.” Maybe firing the commissioner was a bad decision, but that's the situation today.Attentive listeners to Statecraft know I'm pretty critical, like you are, of the regulations that say you have to go in order of seniority. In mass layoffs, you're required to fire a lot of the young, talented people.But let's talk about individual firings. I've been a terrible civil servant, a nightmarish employee from day one. You want to discipline, remove, suspend, or fire me. What are your options?Anybody who has worked in the civil service knows it's hard to fire bad performers. Whatever their political valence, whatever they feel about the civil service system, they have horror stories about a person who just couldn't be removed.In the early 2010s, a spate of stories came out about air traffic controllers sleeping on the job. Then-transportation secretary, Ray LaHood, made a big public announcement: "I'm going to fire these three guys." After these big announcements, it turned out he was only able to remove one of them. One retired, and another had their firing reduced to a suspension.You had another horrific story where a man was joking on the phone with friends when a plane crashed into a helicopter and killed nine people over the Hudson River. National outcry. They said, "We're going to fire this guy." In the end, after going through the process, he only got a suspension. Everyone agrees it's too hard.The basic story is, you have two ways to fire someone. Chapter 75, the old way, is often considered the realm of misconduct: You've stolen something from the office, punched your colleague in the face during a dispute about the coffee, something illegal or just straight-out wrong. We get you under Chapter 75.The 1978 Civil Service Reform Act added Chapter 43, which is supposed to be the performance-based system to remove someone. As with so much of that Civil Service Reform Act, the people who passed it thought this might be the beginning of an entirely different system.In the end, lots of federal managers say there's not a huge difference between the two. Some use 75, some use 43. If you use 43, you have to document very clearly what the person did wrong. You have to put them on a performance improvement plan. If they failed a performance improvement plan after a certain amount of time, they can respond to any claims about what they did wrong. Then, they can take that process up to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) and claim that they were incorrectly fired, or that the processes weren't carried out appropriately. Then, if they want to, they can say, “Nah, I don't like the order I got,” and take it up to federal courts and complain there. Right now, the MSPB doesn't have a full quorum, which is complicating some of the recent removal disputes.You have this incredibly difficult process, unlike the private sector, where your boss looks at you and says, "I don't like how you're giving me the stink-eye today. Out you go." One could say that's good or bad, but, on the whole, I think the model should be closer to the private sector. We should trust managers to do their job without excessive oversight and process. That's clearly about as far from the realm of possibility as the current system, under which the estimate is 6-12 months to fire a very bad performer. The number of people who win at the Merit Systems Protection Board is still 20-30%.This goes into another issue, which is unionization. If you're part of a collective bargaining agreement — most of the regular federal civil service is — first, you have to go with this independent, union-based arbitration and grievance procedure. You're about 50/50 to win on those if your boss tries to remove you.So if I'm in the union, we go through that arbitration grievance system. If you win and I'm fired, I can take it to the Merit Systems Protection Board. If you win again, I can still take it to the federal courts.You can file different sorts of claims at each part. On Chapter 43, the MSPB is supposed to be about the process, not the evidence, and you just have to show it was followed. On 75, the manager has to show by preponderance of the evidence that the employee is harming the agency. Then there are different standards for what you take to the courts, and different standards according to each collective bargaining agreement for the grievance procedure when someone is disciplined. It's a very complicated, abstruse, and procedure-heavy process that makes it very difficult to remove people, which is why the involuntary separation rate at the federal government and most state governments is many multiples lower than the private sector.So, you would love to get me off your team because I'm abysmal. But you have no stomach for going through this whole process and I'm going to fight it. I'm ornery and contrarian and will drag this fight out. In practice, what do managers in the federal government do with their poor performers?I always heard about this growing up. There's the windowless office in the basement without a phone, or now an internet connection. You place someone down there, hope they get the message, and sooner or later they leave. But for plenty of people in America, that's the dream job. You just get to sit and nobody bothers you for eight hours. You punch in at 9 and punch out at 5, and that's your day. "Great. I'll collect that salary for another 10 years." But generally you just try to make life unpleasant for that person.Public sector collective bargaining in the US is new. I tend to think of it as just how the civil service works. But until about 50 years ago, there was no collective bargaining in the public sector.At the state level, it started with Wisconsin at the end of the 1950s. There were famous local government reforms beginning with the Little Wagner Act [signed in 1958] in New York City. Senator Robert Wagner had created the National Labor Relations Board. His son Robert F. Wagner Jr., mayor of New York, created the first US collective bargaining system at the local level in the ‘60s. In ‘62, John F. Kennedy issued an executive order which said, "We're going to deal officially with public sector unions,” but it was all informal and non-statutory.It wasn't until Title VII of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act that unions had a formal, statutory role in our federal service system. This is shockingly new. To some extent, that was the great loss to many civil service reformers in ‘78. They wanted to get through a lot of these other big reforms about hiring and firing, but they gave up on the unions to try to get those. Some people think that exception swallowed the rest of the rules. The union power that was garnered in ‘78 overcame the other reforms people hoped to accomplish. Soon, you had the majority of the federal workforce subject to collective bargaining.But that's changing now too. Part of that Civil Service Reform Act said, “If your position is in a national security-related position, the president can determine it's not subject to collective bargaining.” Trump and the OPM have basically said, “Most positions in the federal government are national security-related, and therefore we're going to declare them off-limits to collective bargaining.” Some people say that sounds absurd. But 60% of the civilian civil service workforce is the Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs, and the Department of Homeland Security. I am not someone who tries to go too easy on this crowd. I think there's a heck of a lot that needs to be reformed. But it's also worth remembering that the majority of the civil service workforce are in these three agencies that Republicans tend to like a lot.Now, whether people like Veterans Affairs is more of an open question. We have some particular laws there about opening up processes after the scandals in the 2010s about waiting lists and hospitals. You had veterans hospitals saying, "We're meeting these standards for getting veterans in the door for these waiting lists." But they were straight-up lying about those standards. Many people who were on these lists waiting for months to see a doctor died in the interim, some from causes that could have been treated had they seen a VA doctor. That led to Congress doing big reforms in the VA in 2014 and 2017, precisely because everyone realized this is a problem.So, Trump has put out these executive orders stopping collective bargaining in all of these agencies that touch national security. Some of those, like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), seem like a tough sell. I guess that, if you want to dig a mine and the Chinese are trying to dig their own mine and we want the mine to go quickly without the EPA pettifogging it, maybe. But the core ones are pretty solid. So far the courts have upheld the executive order to go in place. So collective bargaining there could be reformed.But in the rest of the government, there are these very extreme, long collective bargaining agreements between agencies and their unions. I've hit on the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) as one that's had pretty extensive bargaining with its union. When we created the TSA to supervise airport security, a lot of people said, "We need a crème de la crème to supervise airports after 9/11. We want to keep this out of union hands, because we know unions are going to make it difficult to move people around." The Obama administration said, "Nope, we're going to negotiate with the union." Now you have these huge negotiations with the unions about parking spots, hours of employment, uniforms, and everything under the sun. That makes it hard for managers in the TSA to decide when people should go where or what they should do.One thing we've talked about on Statecraft in past episodes — for instance, with John Kamensky, who was a pivotal figure in the Clinton-Gore reforms — was this relationship between government employees and “Beltway Bandits”: the contractors who do jobs you might think of as civil service jobs. One critique of that ‘90s Clinton-Gore push, “Reinventing Government,” was that although they shrank the size of the civil service on paper, the number of contractors employed by the federal government ballooned to fill that void. They did not meaningfully reduce the total number of people being paid by the federal government. Talk to me about the relationship between the civil service reform that you'd like to see and this army of folks who are not formally employees.Every government service is a combination of public employees and inputs, and private employees and inputs. There's never a single thing the government does — federal, state, or local — that doesn't involve inputs from the private sector. That could be as simple as the uniforms for the janitors. Even if you have a publicly employed janitor, who buys the mop? You're not manufacturing the mops.I understand the critique that the excessive focus on full-time employees in the 1990s led to contracting out some positions that could be done directly by the government. But I think that misses how much of the government can and should be contracted out. The basic Office of Management and Budget (OMB) statute [OMB Circular No. A-76] defining what is an essential government duty should still be the dividing line. What does the government have to do, because that is the public overseeing a process? Versus, what can the private sector just do itself?I always cite Stephen Goldsmith, the old mayor of Indianapolis. He proposed what he called the Yellow Pages test. If you open the Yellow Pages [phone directory] and three businesses do that business, the government should not be in that business. There's three garbage haulers out there. Instead of having a formal government garbage-hauling department, just contract out the garbage.With the internet, you should have a lot more opportunities to contract stuff out. I think that is generally good, and we should not have the federal government going about a lot of the day-to-day procedural things that don't require public input. What a lot of people didn't recognize is how much pressure that's going to put on government contracting officers at the federal level. Last time I checked there were 40,000 contracting officers. They have a lot of power. In the most recent year for which we have data, there were $750 billion in federal contracts. This is a substantial part of our economy. If you total state and local, we're talking almost 10% of our whole economy goes through government contracts. This is mind-boggling. In the public policy world, we should all be spending about 10% of our time thinking about contracting.One of the things I think everyone recognized is that contractors should have more authority. Some of the reform that happened with people like [Steven] Kelman — who was the Office of Federal Procurement Policy head in the ‘90s under Clinton — was, "We need to give these people more authority to just take a credit card and go buy a sheaf of paper if that's what they need. And we need more authority to get contract bids out appropriately.”The same message that animates civil service reform should animate these contracting discussions. The goal should be setting clear goals that you want — for either a civil servant or a contractor — and then giving that person the discretion to meet them. If you make the civil service more stultified, or make pay compression more extreme, you're going to have to contract more stuff out.People talk about the General Schedule [pay scale], but we haven't talked about the Federal Wage Schedule system at all, which is the blue-collar system that encompasses about 200,000 federal employees. Pay compression means those guys get paid really well. That means some managers rightfully think, "I'd like to have full-time supervision over some role, but I would rather contract it out, because I can get it a heck of a lot cheaper."There's a continuous relationship: If we make the civil service more stultified, we're going to push contracting out into more areas where maybe it wouldn't be appropriate. But a lot of things are always going to be appropriate to contract out. That means we need to give contracting officers and the people overseeing contracts a lot of discretion to carry out their missions, and not a lot of oversight from the Government Accountability Office or the courts about their bids, just like we shouldn't give OPM excess input into the civil service hiring process.This is a theme I keep harping on, on Statecraft. It's counterintuitive from a reformer's perspective, but it's true: if you want these processes to function better, you're going to have to stop nitpicking. You're going to have to ease up on the throttle and let people make their own decisions, even when sometimes you're not going to agree with them.This is a tension that's obviously happening in this administration. You've seen some clear interest in decentralization, and you've seen some centralization. In both the contract and the civil service sphere, the goal for the central agencies should be giving as many options as possible to the local managers, making sure they don't go extremely off the rails, but then giving those local managers and contracting officials the ability to make their own choices. The General Services Administration (GSA) under this administration is doing a lot of government-wide acquisition contracts. “We establish a contract for the whole government in the GSA. Usually you, the local manager, are not required to use that contract if you want computer services or whatever, but it's an option for you.”OPM should take a similar role. "Here's the system we have set up. You can take that and use it as you want. It's here for you, but it doesn't have to be used, because you might have some very particular hiring decisions to make.” Just like there shouldn't be one contracting decision that decides how we buy both a sheaf of computer paper and an aircraft carrier, there shouldn't be one hiring and firing process for a janitor and a nuclear physicist. That can't be a centralized process, because the very nature of human life is that there's an infinitude of possibilities that you need to allow for, and that means some amount of decentralization.I had an argument online recently about New York City's “buy local” requirement for certain procurement contracts. When they want to build these big public toilets in New York City, they have to source all the toilet parts from within the state, even if they're $200,000 cheaper in Portland, Oregon.I think it's crazy to ask procurement and contracting to solve all your policy problems. Procurement can't be about keeping a healthy local toilet parts industry. You just need to procure the toilet.This is another area where you see similar overlap in some of the civil service and contracting issues. A lot of cities have residency requirements for many of their positions. If you work for the city, you have to live inside the city. In New York, that means you've got a lot of police officers living on Staten Island, or right on the line of the north side of the Bronx, where they're inches away from Westchester. That drives up costs, and limits your population of potential employees.One of the most amazing things to me about the Biden Bipartisan Infrastructure Law was that it encouraged contracting officers to use residency requirements: “You should try to localize your hiring and contracting into certain areas.” On a national level, that cancels out. If both Wyoming and Wisconsin use residency requirements, the net effect is not more people hired from one of those states! So often, people expect the civil service and contracting to solve all of our ills and to point the way forward for the rest of the economy on discrimination, hiring, pay, et cetera. That just leads to, by definition, government being a lot more expensive than the private sector.Over the next three and a half years, what would you like to see the administration do on civil service reform that they haven't already taken up?I think some of the broad-scale layoffs, which seem to be slowing down, were counterproductive. I do think that their ability to achieve their ends was limited by the nature of the reduction-in-force regulations, which made them more counterproductive than they had to be. That's the situation they inherited. But that didn't mean you had to lay off a lot of people without considering the particular jobs they were doing now.And hiring quite a few of them back.Yeah. There are also debates obviously, within the administration, between DOGE and Russ Vought [director of the OMB] and some others on this. Some things, like the Schedule Policy/Career — which is the revival of Schedule F in the first Trump administration — are largely a step in the right direction. Counter to some of the critics, it says, “You can remove someone if they're in a policymaking position, just like if they were completely at-will. But you still have to hire from the typical civil service system.” So, for those concerned about politicization, that doesn't undermine that, because they can't just pick someone from the party system to put in there. I think that's good.They recently had a suitability requirement rule that I think moved in the right direction. That says, “If someone's not suitable for the workforce, there are other ways to remove them besides the typical procedures.” The ideal system is going to require some congressional input: it's to have a decentralization of hiring authority to individual managers. Which means the OPM — now under Scott Kupor, who has finally been confirmed — saying, "The OPM is here to assist you, federal managers. Make sure you stay within the broad lanes of what the administration's trying to accomplish. But once we give you your general goals, we're going to trust you to do that, including hiring.”I've mentioned it a few times, but part of the Chance to Compete Act — which was mentioned in one of Trump's Day One executive orders, people forget about this — was saying, “Implement the Chance to Compete Act to the maximum extent of the law.” Bring more subject-matter expertise into the hiring process, allow more discretion for managers and input into the hiring process. I think carrying that bipartisan reform out is going to be a big step, but it's going to take a lot more work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub

What if you could remove the obstacles that stand in your way and shape your life's direction with purpose? My guest, Dhiren Harchandani, believes that the secret to overcoming challenges and flourishing in life boils down to one essential skill: mastering our inner game. Today, he will share with us how to achieve this through his insightful wisdom and personal stories. Dhiren Harchandani is a growth coach who has mentored entrepreneurs and organizations. As a TEDx speaker, he passionately advocates for unlocking human potential. An entrepreneur with over two decades of experience scaling businesses across five industries, his contributions have earned him recognition among the Top 40 Change Management Leaders. A graduate of Harvard Business School's OPM program, Dhiren's approach integrates a dynamic blend of NLP, neuroscience, and psychology to achieve transformative results. Beyond his mission to guide one billion individuals in mastering their Inner Game, Dhiren is an avid mountaineer. He competes in Ironman races and has traversed the diverse landscapes of over 70 countries, spanning all 7 continents. In our conversation, Dhiren will help us in identifying the patterns that hold us back and share practical techniques we can incorporate into our everyday lives to break free and live with more meaning. You'll discover how to cultivate resilience, confidence, and self-belief to realize your dreams and fulfill your potential.

Agencies are facing tons of changing expectations from the Office of Personnel Management this year. In the last few weeks alone, OPM has told agencies how to think differently about awarding employees for good work, as well as how to implement recent changes to the federal probationary period. To help make sense of it all Federal News Network's Drew Friedman caught up with the Partnership for Public Services, Vice President of Government Affairs, Jenny Mattingly.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode of the Real Estate Investing School podcast, host Joe Jensen interviews Ray Glymph, a real estate investor and business coach who overcame homelessness to own over 100 properties. Ray discusses how his tough beginnings fueled his ambition, ultimately leading him to win awards like “Best New Business of the Year” and the NAACP Champion of Change. His inspiring journey is packed with lessons on building real estate success through resilience and self-motivation. Ray dives into his unique investing approach, from house hacking to managing multi-unit complexes on the East Coast. Initially self-managing his properties to maximize profit, Ray eventually took on partners and used other people's money (OPM) to scale efficiently. He shares the value of hands-on management, relationship-building, and a deep understanding of the market. Throughout the episode, Ray emphasizes his core values of health, wealth, and freedom, and how they guide his investment philosophy. He provides insights on creative financing, scaling, and balancing life and work. This conversation is a motivating listen for investors at all levels, showing how real estate can unlock financial freedom through strategic, disciplined growth. Ready to take your real estate investing game to the next level? Book a free one-on-one strategy call with one of our experienced coaches and see how we can help you grow your portfolio, no matter your experience level! Book a free real estate investing strategy call! No experience necessary. Check out the Real Estate Investing School Youtube Real Estate Investing School Instagram Brody's Instagram Joe's Instagram Ray's Instagram

It's a busy time for federal retirements. From rising health care costs to the surge in retirement applications, there's a lot to keep track of. And, OPM has launched a new online retirement system at the same time. Here to explain what makes a retirement case “clean,” how to avoid common delays, and what federal employees should be thinking about before they hit submit is Tammy Flanagan, Principal at Retire Federal.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Title:  How Survive When Real Estate Deals Fail with Ruben Kanya Summary: In this conversation, Seth Bradley, a securities attorney and real estate investor, discusses the complexities of capital raising, the importance of experimentation in finding one's niche, and the critical role of networking and trust in the investment landscape. He shares insights from his journey in real estate and tech, emphasizing the need for grit and public speaking skills to succeed in capital raising. The discussion also highlights the challenges of the first capital raise and the lessons learned along the way. In this conversation, the speakers delve into the multifaceted benefits of hosting a podcast, emphasizing the importance of listening and connection. They explore the intricacies of capital raising in real estate, discussing the significance of grit, networking, and leveraging other people's money. The dialogue also covers compliance with securities laws, compensation structures in syndication, and the emerging trend of fund to fund structures. Tribevest is introduced as a solution for simplifying fund management and ensuring compliance in capital raising efforts. Links to listen and subscribe: https://podcasts.apple.com/ph/podcast/raising-capital-the-right-way-compliance-funds-and/id1341895972?i=1000688593916 Links to watch and subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyF9Z72m2R0 Bullet Point Highlights: You need a license to raise capital legally. Experimenting with different models helps identify what works for you. Building authority and trust is essential in capital raising. Networking with high net worth individuals is crucial. The first capital raise is often the hardest. Grit and determination are key to success in entrepreneurship. Public speaking skills can enhance your ability to communicate effectively. Learning from clients can provide valuable insights for your own journey. You can leverage your existing skills to add value in capital raises. Building a strong network can facilitate easier capital raising. Having a podcast enhances listening skills and fosters connections. Capital raising requires grit, a strong network, and resources. Leveraging other people's money accelerates business growth. Compliance with securities laws is crucial in capital raising. Compensation structures in syndication vary based on deal size and type. Fund to fund structures are becoming more prevalent in real estate. Effective communication is key to successful networking. Tribevest simplifies the process of raising capital compliantly. Understanding the legalities of capital raising is essential for success. Building a community can expedite personal and professional growth. Transcript: Ruben Kanya (00:00.142) whole idea here is you're actually not allowed to raise capital without a license. So just like being a doctor or a dentist or an attorney, you have to have a license to be able to raise capital and it's called a broker dealer or potentially an RIA, registered investment advisor. So if you're not one of those people, if you don't have a license, you need to have an exemption from having that license. if it's your, this is speaking in generalities, but if it's your own deal, if it's your own fund,   If it's your own syndication, if you're the one buying the property, that's an exemption. You're exempted. You can raise capital for your own deal and that's okay. And that's kind of the co-GP concept that we talk about sometimes. I actually don't like to say co-GP because to me it's a fallacy. There's no such thing as a co-GP. You're either a GP and an active partner.   Who's this? you're an entrepreneur? you're a real estate investor? you're trying to learn from those who did it? Well, come into the lab then. Put your white coat on, gloves on, notepad, and let's go, Joe.   Experiment nation this episode was a really fun one with Seth Bradley who is a fun manager Invest in entrepreneurs. He's an attorney he as a startup founders of software as a service and Really what I loved about What he's built is   Everything that he's built, it's vertically integrated, which I love, but he really embodies the principles of experimenting. Right. And what I mean by that is he has tried multiple models in real estate, which allowed him to get exposure, which I think is really important when I talk about having a well-rounded experiment in your lab, LabAK being your life, so that you can at least identify   (Seth Bradley) (02:10.529) what you like, what you don't like, what gives you return on energy, what drains you. I think those are all important things for us to then be able to niche down. A lot of times we talk about niching down, but we haven't even gotten a taste of what's on the menu to even understand what it is that we want to niche down in. And so part of what I created here at Experimentation in the lab is to bring you   folks who can present the menu of the different options that there is in not only real estate, but in business and even career to then give you that exposure so that you can then get a taste even from this show and then implement it yourself and maybe try one or two or three experiments or four or five. How many it takes for you to feel like this is the thing. This is the thing that I'm going to hold on to and grasp to and go all in on. Right. And that's what we did.   And keep in mind that life has seasons. A lot of us can do something and it could be four seasons. Your season could be five years, 10 years, 15, but I do believe in the compound effect. his journey, Seth's journey, he was able to get his first duplex, then quads, then small multifamilies and big multifamily units. And the next thing you know, he's doing $120 million a deal just in 2022 alone, right? In one year.   But with that, one thing I wanted to highlight, so one thing is the experiment, different exposures, AKA building blocks towards the very thing that he's doing now. But the other thing is being able to get a free, or I should say, get a paid internship. And that's through servicing your clients, learning from them, and then taking a page from their book. He was an attorney that was putting down together his SEC deals of syndications,   capital raising, and then he learned from his clients because he had full transparency. Sometimes, often we're in a position where the proof of concept is right in front of us, but we don't grab it by the horns. We just see it for what it is, just clocking and clocking out. No matter what job you have, there's an opportunity for you to actually take lessons, systems, SOPs, structure, any skillset to take it to the next level for your own endeavors.   (Seth Bradley) (04:38.252) And what I mean by that is I was a realtor and I was a realtor for the investor. understood how investors, underwrote their deals. And that was my win for me to hone my craft in real estate, underwriting deals, pulling comps, walking properties, understanding value at all. That was when I was the realtor for the investor. You can still look it up on bigger pockets. You can still see my page. That's what I was doing. I was helping investors invest until I then became an investor myself.   And in this case, he was an ICC attorney providing these, you know, going through the process of doing syndications, fund to fund, et cetera. And then he learned and he said, not only do I have a practice that does it, but I can also be on the other side of that transaction. So don't you ever forget the importance of being on the other side of the transaction in whatever service that you offer, even if it's just call it.   You work in hospitality at a restaurant to make ends meet. There's a system, there's a SOP, there's a checklist. There's something in there that is a proof of concept that you can then take and implement somewhere in your business. And the universe will tell you its secrets if you listen. The clues are all around us. Last but not least, I love our conversation around being an authority, building a brand.   Essentially, that's what capital raising is and he talked about three pillars. I don't want to talk about he said money Right is one heart of the center trust in your network, right? Your network is you gotta have a big network He talks about having a platform like this where I think everybody should have a podcast because you get the interview you get to learn the skills of communication listening, etc but most importantly you foster relationship while on the air and then   It builds trust to whoever's listening. I'm sure that if you're listening right now and you and I wanted to go into a deal together, there's some form of trust. If this is not your, your first episode. So there's that, right? We talked about having a meetup, restarting our meetups. That's key. Connecting people, they trust in you. Being an authoritative figure, trust. They can't flow you if they don't know you. So stop being cute and stop hiding and put yourself out there. Right? Money. Money follows all of the above network and trust.   (Seth Bradley) (07:00.408) people who have money in your network will make it easier than those who are in your network who are broke. So surround yourself with people who have money, not just because they have money, but of course it can help you tremendously if you're trying to raise capital. And there's something that goes about saying with people who have money, it's not that they're better or anything, but there is a level of opulence and abundance.   And I think there should be a good balance. But certainly if you're trying to raise money with people who don't have money and you're in a circle, people don't know how many doesn't mean to say that you can't uplift them when you have an opportunity, but it's going to be hard to raise capital from people who don't have capital. Right. So that's one thing to keep in mind. Money trust network and being an authority. You can build an authority from home in the lab, in a studio, in person.   And you don't always have to be an expert in something else. Sometimes you can actually have authority within your own circle. If you're a dentist and you're trying to raise capital with other dentists, they trust you. You have authority maybe in your current marketplace, you're a manager of some kind or you're a lead or you're just someone that people really trust. You have that authority. You have trust already with like-minded people in your circle. So this was a great one. He brought a lot of core values home. And that's what I love about   the show. It's every time you listen or anytime you interview someone who's had done some amazing leaps and experiments in their own lab, there's always some consistent clues that kind of bring to the surface and maybe it just, I'm aware of them, but if not, my goal is to extract that and make them aware for you. So I trust that you're going to get a lot from this episode without further ado, Seth Bradley in the lab, y'all.   Experimentation, what's going on? Your host Ruben here. Today I have the pleasure of connecting with a gentleman that we connected with, had some mutual connections. And I was like, I didn't want to let the serendipity go to waste because I saw there was a mutual beneficial component to the lab, as I always say. And I always think you're as good as your tools, you're as good as your resources. And so I'm really happy to have the gentleman here step into the lab with us to give us insight. And I also love the   (Seth Bradley) (09:21.39) I'll call it a vertical integration I think and maybe Seth will keep me honest here, but without further ado I want to welcome Seth Bradley. How's it my man? Welcome to the lab brother   Going great, man. Ruben, really appreciate you having me on. Thanks for having me in the lab.   Absolutely, man. I should so listen if I'm curious so Seth because you know, we we start to talk a little bit and I was a car We're getting to the weeds of things. I want to make sure I hit this record button, but I'm just a curious guy and I'm so curious that if I'm at a real estate conference and you and I sit next to each other and I say hey I'm Ruben Seth. Nice to meet you. You know, what do you do for a living? What do you lead with because you have a very interesting background? So I want to we're gonna reverse engineer, but I'm so curious as to   at the time that we're recording this, what do you lead with if you don't know what my interests are, you don't know where I'm coming from, I could be an investor, I could be interested in putting my money to work, what do you lead with? I'm just so curious.   I love that question, man, because sometimes I have a hard time answering it. It's an easy question to answer for most people, but for me, I have to think about it for a second. But typically I'll lead with I'm a securities attorney, specifically a real estate securities attorney. So if you're raising capital for real estate from passive investors, I'm your guy. can help you put together your fund or your syndication compliantly and secondarily, or, you know, one B I'll call it a tech founder. So involved in a few tech startups as well.   (Seth Bradley) (10:48.238) That's awesome. Then that opens up the window because I see her tech founder and then I securities attorney. Is that that accurate?   Yep, nailed it.   securities attorney. would you do you happen to do you still do I mean, of course, you've been involved in raising capital yourself, which is what I want to lead with next. But are you actively investing? And if you are, what is the model? Is it more investing in the startup? Or is it more investing in actual capitals? I should say social capital relationships, or even you know what, maybe it's some form of real estate, what is your current I guess, investing   season for lack of better words.   Yeah, it's all across the board, man. mean, everything that you mentioned, I mean, just quickly, I started in real estate in 2013. House hacked into a duplex did kind of the bigger pockets podcast. Listen to that. Red Rich Dad, Poor Dad, you know, the typical journey you take and house hacked into a duplex and started buying bigger and bigger properties got to the point where, you know, I wanted to get into syndications and funds and start raising capital. So I started actually investing passively into real estate first and I got my feet wet.   Ruben Kanya (12:01.55) figured out what that investor journey looked like. And then I started raising capital myself from my own syndications where potentially I could be just a capital partner or also an operator. So I raised a good amount of capital from 2019 to 2023, I would say, before the interest rates started to spike. And then we slowed down a bit, but we still own a good amount of that real estate and just put it in perspective. We bought about $120 million with the real estate in 2022 alone. And now I'm kind of   involved with a handful of tech startups where I'm also in that same capacity where I'm raising capital or helping the CEO raise capital for seed rounds for these startups.   Okay, very interesting. So I'm glad let's go to the very beginning because you talked about bigger pockets with shout out to bigger pockets, right? Because that's or did you say bigger pockets? I did hear you say that. Okay, cool. had a mutual kind of, know, I was planning my seeds. I think that they did an amazing job, of course, like minded investors together. 2013 get a duplex. I'm sure one thing I'm curious about and you know, someone else might be listening is, you know, what   point now every everyone's situation is different with that said, but at what point did you start to think, okay, it's time to bring in some outside capital and, I'm going to lead with you. It seems that you strike me as a guy who does things strategically. enlighten me a little bit as to get the duplex. Was there another lever that was pulled to get the next property before you start to raise capital? Or is that right away, right into, okay, now it's time to raise capital. Cause   duplex going to take me so far. Tell me about that journey.   Ruben Kanya (13:43.732) No, I mean, that journey was, you know, a lot of different types of things. mean, I've wholesaled, I've fixed and flipped single family properties. We were doing that in Cleveland for a while. Then we kind of moved on to multifamily, you know, smaller multifamilies up to four units, which is still residential, but then up to, you know, like 16 units, those sorts of things. Then we started getting to where, you know, capital starts getting constrained, your own capital, or if you're doing like a JV, starts getting constrained. But I was fortunate enough that my legal practice, which also started in 2013,   was highly related to what I was doing. So as a real estate attorney, my real estate clients were raising capital for their real estate deals. So then I got into securities law. So I saw how they were raising capital. Then I started helping them raise capital from the legal side. And then I started raising, and then I realized that, hey, if we want to go bigger, I've got to be more like my clients who are buying, you know, 50, $100 million properties. How do we do that? Well, like they do it. They need to raise capital from either   passive investors or from, larger investors like family offices and places like that. So I knew that that was the pathway. So I was fortunate enough to kind of have that perspective shown to me by my clients and they kind of showed me the blueprint. Hey, this is how you need to do it. Now, a lot of other attorneys see that same blueprint and they don't really have that entrepreneurial mindset. So they're kind of just like that service oriented, Hey, let's do what I'm doing. And I'm just going to help. But I have an entrepreneurial mindset. I I'm like,   I want to do that. I want to buy that property. I want to run that business. I want to scale it. like anything else, though, I still had a little bit of reservation, I would say. So I decided to invest passively first just to get my feet wet, just to see what that investor experience was like. And then once I did that a few times, I really got into the active side and dove right in.   Oh man, I love so many elements of that. Let's unpack the experiment phase, right? Because that's what I truly believe in. I'm curious to what your thoughts are on this, right? Before I even preface by saying this, I think, and this is just a thought, could be wrong. I'm experimenting life as it is. But when you ask someone, hey, what do you want to do for a living? Right? It's like, well, I don't know. I haven't been exposed to enough.   (Seth Bradley) (16:03.116) Right. But then when you start experimenting with a lot of different things, then you can niche down because you've been exposed to like this that I don't like, et cetera. And there's a second leg to that, but I want to touch on that for a second because you said you did wholesale fixing flips, then you need small multifamily. What do you think you were able to gain from that? My personally, when I see that, I see, well, you were able you were able to get insight, but   Again, maybe you see things differently. Maybe it's like you needed to do those things and you thought it was true. And then you were led down one path and led to another. What do you take from that? Were you experimenting or was it more or less of the natural progression of events and what you thought was going to be your end all be all ended up progressing into a new ideal. Tell me about that experience.   Yeah, I mean, I think it was an experiment. It was me trying. I knew I wanted to be in real estate. I love real estate. I've always been drawn to it. It's just been an interesting thing for me and interesting subject. I remember when I was in undergrad and I couldn't afford to buy any kind of real estate or didn't have a job at all. And I was trying to figure out, well, man, how can I buy like these townhouses that I'm living in and rent those out? Like, I remember just being interested from the get go. So I knew I wanted to be in it, but it was certainly an experiment to see.   how to break into the market, how to scale a business. Because once you got into a duplex and your house hacked and bought a few other single family properties, it was like, okay, well, we can continue to do this, but I'm always looking again to scale. And to do that, a lot of times you do need to bring in other people's money to be able to fund that scale. But not always. mean, I think it would be a better pathway, honestly, if you can scale without other people's money, because then you can own 100 % of it. But a lot more difficult to do. So if you want to...   you want to grow with scale fast, typically it's with other people's money. And again, luckily I was already in a profession that gave me that experience to be able to see that pathway and be able to execute on   (Seth Bradley) (18:02.35) Now tell me that's a great insight or at least a transition point there, Seth, because we, know, in our professions, we spend a lot of time, but not a lot of folks spend the time to have the lens of an entrepreneur to say, hey, maybe I can actually take a page from their book. Right. Because I think it's interesting that it's we all are entrepreneurs. Right. So we go into business ourselves to run away from maybe possibly corporate. Some people.   And then we build our own companies. We install systems, we invest in resources. And then it's like, we turn into the thing that we were maybe running away from, but there's a lesson that we get to build it our way and have maybe learned lessons from these big corporations. In your end, it reminds me a little bit of me because I again, certainly not an attorney by any means. And I won't compare being a realtor to an attorney, but you are servicing clients and you get to at least,   at least get nuggets from their journey and then say, Hey, why don't, why don't I take a page from their book? Can you talk to us about that? Because I think honestly, it's an unkept almost secret and not even talked about enough where it's like, Hey, you're taking this opportunity right now to get to understand the playbook, see how they've done it, learn from their mistakes, right? Right. Through service and while getting paid. And then you're like, okay, now I'm going to do it for me. So   Do you see it that way as well? was it kind of, know, or did you strategically go into it thinking that you do that? Or it was kind of like, you know what? This is kind of cool. Let me try it myself.   Yeah, I mean, and Ruben, hats off to you, man, because a lot of realtors and brokers, they're around real estate every single day. That is literally their business. They have access to deals before other people. They get to see things that other people don't get to see. They get to see the transactions. They get to see how they change hands. And as you know, most of them don't invest in real estate. like, you even own your own house? Do you own any investment properties in...   Ruben Kanya (20:11.918) 90 % of them don't, right? Unless it's, well, maybe their own house, but that's probably it. They don't invest. And it's crazy to think about that when they're around that all the time. And it's the same thing with attorneys, right? Like, know, they're, whether there's somebody like me, there's real estate or securities, and they have clients that are, that are buying large properties and raising capital, or it's, you know, some other practice like and A where they're combining companies and building companies and things like that.   I think that there's a certain entrepreneurial DNA that's in some of us and it's not in others. And that's okay. Like some people thrive in an office atmosphere or thrive in a W-2 type of atmosphere. And a lot of times I don't even like to disrupt that. Like people, you know, are comfortable there. They like the steady paycheck and that's okay. And I think the vast majority of people do want that and they do like that. They like the predictability of it. But some of us out there, like me and you, I believe are, you know, we just,   We're not a fit for that. Like we need to build. I think that's the key is, is the build, right? Cause you were talking about, you know, we start putting all the systems and the processes and the things into place to ultimately end up in the, the same machine that we didn't want to work for. But I don't think that's the piece that's important. The piece is important is that that climb the build, we want to build like we were builders. love to build.   Yeah. Have you ever had a conversation, with maybe your associates on? I don't know if this is a hypocritical question, because I don't know if I could answer this. But I'm curious, have you had a conversation with another attorney? Like, hey, you see this all the time. Have ever thought of doing it yourself? What's the mindset behind? Have you had that conversation? And have you had around those? Yeah, just curious.   Yeah, I definitely, I definitely have. think, you know, at least specifically with the attorney industry or with that profession, we are, we're trained to look at risk. We're trained to evaluate liability. We are trained to be conservative in nature. and that is totally different than when you're an entrepreneur and you're out there building a business and you're, don't know what tomorrow is going to bring. And there's going to be a problem that pops up today that you didn't expect.   Ruben Kanya (22:30.01) And you don't know if you're going to be able to pay payroll and all these different things that come up as an entrepreneur, as a business builder, that's totally a different mindset than it is that attorneys are trained for. So I think that's definitely a separation. like, you know, I have a lot of investors that are attorneys. That was, that's who my investor base is. Typically it's other attorneys. A lot of other capital raisers don't go after attorneys because they are paying the ass. We ask a lot of questions. Like I said, we are risk averse. Like, you know, we're not the ideal.   person or people to raise from.   I'm gonna predict my money isn't really the case.   with a cold on the page. 137 second paragraph line four. What does that mean? Why is that? And, know, that's the kind of stuff you have to deal with. But, you know, they do make a good amount of money. So there's a, you know, there's a push, there's a give take there. But, you know, I think that that's, I have identified that with conversations with my investors and obviously my prior colleagues. I mean, that in itself is, is a big difference.   It's a big difference. We're just as attorneys, we're just trained to find and look at risk and think about all the bad things that can happen. And man, when you're building a business, when you're growing out on your own and you say, I'm done with my W-2, I don't want that paycheck anymore. That's a lot of risk, right? Or at least it's a lot of risk to a person that thinks that way. I actually don't think that way. I think it's more risky to be have one income stream and be a W-2, but that's certainly not the way that they typically look at it.   (Seth Bradley) (24:02.306) Yeah, no, it's interesting what you're saying. But I'm also curious though, that if they are also investing, because it sounds like you've also worked with some associates, or at least your investors have come from the same cloth, it sounds like they might be, instead of again, raising the capital like you are, high risk, high leverage, they're willing to put their money to work. Do you find that   And I guess maybe that's it. Do you find that that kind of archetype is finding that to be of a less riskier approach versus flipping versus doing it themselves? Or do you find that it's more of time constraint thing? it's like, listen, I got the money. You mentioned it. I have a high net worth. I'm an accredited investor. Let me just do it with someone who's an expert. What have you seen since you've been on both sides, and especially as a fundraiser?   Yeah, I think it's that investor profile. You know, these are folks that make a lot of money from their W-2. They have no time on their hands because their W-2 is so demanding. then any time they have outside of that, it's got to be spent with family. So they really just don't have any time, but they do have capital. So it's just that investor profile that you're dealing with with attorneys and some of the similar, you know, with doctors and dentists and engineers and people like that. Same thing. You know, they're highly paid professionals.   You know, they went to school for a long time. They make a lot of money, but they don't have any time. And unless they really want to venture out and say, okay, I want to raise capital or, or, I don't know, you have to figure out a way to carve out more time because they certainly don't have it. I know when I worked in big law firms and I'm trying to bill 2000 hours a year, I don't have time to, you know, invest actively. In fact, I actually got fired from my big law job, my last one, because of that, because I'm raising capital and doing real estate deals.   and starting businesses and guess what? You don't have time to do that if you're working at a demanding job, whether that's as an attorney or Dr. Dennis, whoever that might be. So I think it just comes down to that profile and do you have time? Do you have capital? And then whatever one you have a surplus of, that's probably where you're going to fit into the asset. So you can invest if you have capital and no time.   Ruben Kanya (26:26.126) You need to find something a little bit more passive and that comes through like funds and syndications and things like that.   All right. So that's very helpful and I think very interesting because you've seen both sides. You not only were on the other side, but you've also been the capital raiser and then you've also yourself invested passively. Tell me about the first deal that if you recall, at least the like kind deal when you raised capital, who did you go to?   Did you start with your client base? Did you start with friends and family? And then maybe we can even get into the granularity. I know there's different non-accredited, accredited 506V versus 506C. There's a lot of different kind of foundational pillars. But talk to us about what your first deal was like, if you recall some of the numbers and what kind of asset type and then who you actually pulled in. So people can start thinking of actually what's possible when we talk about capital.   you know, in fundraising, we think of it as this big thing, but people like you and me can actually start initiating these kinds of transactions. Talk to us about your first one.   Yeah, man, I mean, don't remember the actual specifics, but it was like 100 because there's around 150 unit multifamily something like that was your first That was the first raise it was the first raise but I was brought I I wasn't the primary operating partner I brought in as a capital raiser that sort of thing and also providing some legal services as well. Um, but I was   (Seth Bradley) (27:48.078) That was your first race.   (Seth Bradley) (28:01.422) Hold on. That's interesting. Now you kind of you're kind of double. Is that is that how you got your general partner essentially? Were you a general partner on that? Or were you tell us about that? Because from what I understand, you can correct me if I'm wrong here. You're the expert. You can bring in different subject matter expertise to the table to value your I guess your position and a capital raise. Maybe one is investor relations, one, et cetera. Did you from what I understand, bacon?   some of your services and as a GP or is that, what did you?   Yeah, for sure. Yeah. I was a general partner on that deal, baking in some of my legal services as well. Started leveraging my skillset that's super valuable. Obviously, it's applicable to these capital raises. I can help you raise capital and also be the securities attorney and also potentially the real estate attorney as well on the deal. So lots of different ways that I can get in there and provide value to the active partnership.   But yeah, I I was tasked with raising, you know, half a million dollars. I didn't hit it. I hit way under. I think I might've raised like a couple hundred thousand dollars. And I was pretty happy that I even hit that because it's the first time. I'm, and I'll tell you what, man, like capital raising is hard. Like I think that, you know, you see all these masterminds out there and these coaching programs and things and they're teaching how to raise capital and some are great. And I'm actually in a couple of them. but they are, you know, they, have to sell you on that. easy, right? They have to sell you on, Hey,   I'll give you the systems, the processes and boom, you're going to be able to raise a million dollars easily. It's not that easy. unless you already have a built in network of high net worth individuals, that's where you'll find success. Or maybe you have a platform like yours where you can access a lot of people that you already have a relationship with and you'll like, and trust you that love what you're doing. And they're like, man, if he's investing in this, it must be good. So that those people, like you, and then also people that are.   Ruben Kanya (29:59.426) we tend to see a lot of doctors and dentists that are very successful right out of the gate. Cause guess what? They work with other doctors and dentists who already trust them, who have money, who already trust them. So they do great. and then others, like me are probably somewhere in the middle, right? We we've got a base of investors that are like attorneys, which seem like they'd be great because they have money, but guess what? They're a pain in the ass. So there's, there's a little bit of give take there. and then you have other folks who,   you know, maybe they're a school teacher or something like that where their colleagues maybe don't have a ton of money to invest and they have to follow just like, you know, follow the processes, the systems and the marketing funnels and those things and rely really heavily on that. And typically it doesn't go that well. It doesn't on the first one. You've really got to be scrappy. Like you've got to get in there. You've got to literally make a list of a hundred people that you know, that might want to invest right.   type it up, go systematically through that list, and you've gotta break out of your shell and not be afraid to just reach out to these people, no shame, get your pitch together and just do it. And it feels awkward and you don't wanna do it and you feel like a salesperson, but you've gotta do it. You've gotta break through those reservations and make it happen because that first raise is a bear. You've gotta just be.   You've got to be scrappy and you've got to do whatever it takes and 10x whatever you think is going to take.   Experiment nation, you've heard me talk about how multiple investors across the nation are landing these lucrative midterm rental insurance contracts by making these small tweaks on the branding and marketing side, especially if you're an existing short-term rental operator, there is a quick and easy shift that you can make with the ride guide in place. And because we've launched a two-day bootcamp,   (Seth Bradley) (31:59.278) that not everyone could attend in real time, I've put together a recording where you can get all the materials and all the guides to focus on rebranding either your short term rental business or your current midterm rental business so that you can actually have the insurance companies reach out to you. And then day two is if you want to actually play offense, how you can reach out to them by listing on the right platforms, et cetera.   If you're looking to get this MTR bootcamp so that you can start optimizing and you can start receiving these lucrative contracts that again, provide less headaches, less turnovers, unlike the Airbnb space, you can start receiving inquiries today by having the right guide in place. So please go to experimentrealestate.com for slash MTR bootcamp or click the link in the bio to make sure you get your hands on the   and midterm rental insurance bootcamp to fast track your way into landing these lucrative insurance contracts the exact same ways multiple investors have taken advantage of this unknown and untapped niche within the midterm rental umbrella. Wow, so I'm a systems guy and as you're speaking, I'm taking notes here guys. I heard three key pillars and feel free to add to them because I wanna hear.   kind of the downfall of some of what folks are coaching. I heard one is money, number two is trust, and number three is network. And I like how you highlighted those because I hear, well, if you have a network and you can get access and you have a large pool, then there's probably people who are gonna have money in there. Then if you have what I'm hearing is authority, trust, AKA I'm a doctor, you're a doctor, we speak the same language. And by the way, guess what? Third pillar, we all have money.   So that's kind of like the sweet, sounds like that's the sweet spot. MTN money trust and network. What did I miss?   Ruben Kanya (34:03.89) You nailed it, man. That's it. That's kind of the big level, the high level things that you need. I mean, you need that authority or you need to be able to show that you know what you're doing, that you know what you talk about and what you're talking about, that sort of thing. And then obviously that network, you either have to develop that through your W-2 that you already have or however it might be, or maybe you have a platform, right? Like maybe you have a platform like a podcast or an investor group.   or an in-person meetup. We don't do those as much as we used to before COVID, but that used to be a huge thing. Like I were on a real estate meetup in San Diego County or something like that. And it goes, that used to go really, really well for people to be able to raise capital. So yeah, you gotta have that platform. Network. I know, right, Networking lunch.   You should bring that back. There's something about because there's something about this, right? This is cool. Like, what a time to be alive where you and I can connect in the flesh. But I want to echo what you just said. Because I'm kind of speaking to myself as a reminder, Ruben, you got to get these meetups going again. We used to do a meetup in New York and Atlanta.   And just the relationships that happen in the room and you're being the super connector is so powerful. I wouldn't get cute and just, you know, this is great that you and I can connect while you're in San Diego and I'm here in Boston, but it's not, or it's and, I think we should, I think we should bring it back. Cause I could tell it may a super charismatic dude, great energy. you know, obviously you're authoritative figure and I feel like, I think, it will only service more.   never seen.   (Seth Bradley) (35:41.87) to have these in there's something about in person. So yeah, I'm just I'm preaching to the choir, but I'm also like, hey, accountability, I'm gonna check up on you. gotta do the same.   You gotta appreciate it. Tell me sure man. And it's great. Like when we meet on something like this and we have some interactions on social media and then we get on each other's podcast, you know, get to know each other. And then when you meet in person, you're like, this is awesome. You already feel like you know the person. So technology is a great and right. Another and yeah.   Yeah, don't sleep on that fit that in person. We need more of that if anything. And people are, you know what, people I think are actually searching for it with all this technology. So good reminder for the both of us and whoever who's listening. I want to touch on something that you said, Seth. You mentioned, because I like learning from those who either have failed or made mistakes because can expedite our learning process. So you said,   First deal typically, uh first one doesn't go well, uh, it's a bear but then you also mentioned that uh, you know Some some mastermind programs, right and there's a lot out there good and bad and some are better than others. Uh, some of them, you know I see I guess uh, maybe Don't um, I should say, um, maybe they fall a little short   of helping you get to your first link. What's missing? What's the missing link? We talk about money, trust and network, but like if I wanted to nail it the first time the right way without, and I wanted to learn from someone like you from, your mistakes or from someone else's mistakes or from, know, those masterminds that are just falling short, what is a, is, is it a foundational or at least insight or lesson learn or thing I should keep top of mind in addition to the money, trust and network that would maybe put me in a   (Seth Bradley) (37:40.024) position not to have the first one be so challenging.   Yeah, I mean, to be honest with you, I think it's going to be challenging no matter what. I mean, I think what I was going to say is actually grit, right? You have to have grit. So I think it kind of it's a counterbalance here where you have a mastermind or coaching program or a class or something like that that you're selling to somebody. And the only way somebody is going to buy it is if you say, hey, buy this or come join me in this group and   I'll make it easy for you to do what you want to do. Like that's the selling point. You have to say that it's going to be easy to get them to pay you to do it. But the problem is once they're in, you realize it's not easy. So, you know,   People sell the promise, not the process.   That's right. That's right. So, you know, I think maybe I don't know if there's any way around that. Like you certainly can't sell it is going to be hard and be like, Hey, well, if you buy my $20,000 program, you're probably not going to make it. So you can, if you want, you know, it's just not, it's not going to work. So I don't know if that's going to change, but I would say maybe once you get into that program, then you preach that, look, I can give you the systems, I can give you the processes. I can even teach you the compliance and I can hook you up with all my different, you know, my network and   Ruben Kanya (38:59.21) hook you up with my securities attorney and my CPA and my funnel builder and those sorts of things. But at the end of the day, really emphasize that it's going to be work. You have to not only implement the systems, but you're going to have to scrap. Just like building any business, capital raising is a hard business and you're going to have to do things that are going to make you uncomfortable. And if you don't go all in, you're not going to make it. That's all there is. It's just like any business.   or even a piece of a business. So me and my wife own a few gyms together and like sometimes we'll implement like you know, a promotion or something. Right. And if we half asset, it doesn't work. It just doesn't. It simply does not work. You have to have full buy-in. You have to believe in it yourself and you have to get your teammates and your employees to believe in it or they won't or they won't grow in the same direction as you. You've got to be all in just like with any business or it's not going to work.   love that. That's a good one. The belief system is certainly a big one. And I'm sure it comes off across, especially in this space of capital raising, you people want to know that, do you believe in what you're saying, right? Just as much as you believe in yourself. That's interesting. So   Tactically, was talking to this gentleman yesterday at the gym, speaking of the gym, a young guy, a hustler, you know, making some good money. And we were kind of talking about, you know, journey, you know, part of the journey is, you know, acquiring skill sets and honing your and sharpening the axe, for lack of a better word. And so I'm curious, you know,   And I'm going to stick to my pillager because that's a reference point for me. But if I'm thinking of, what is one skill? Not saying for this is the end all be all by any means, just curses. If I was to focus and truly get really, really good at one skill and, can she not just achieve mastery in it? Is it fostering relationships, remembering Seth's birthday, what he does? Is it being able to really get   (Seth Bradley) (41:17.998) great at communication and putting together a pitch deck, just to get a little bit more granular of like, what skillsets should I be thinking of, of honing, flexing that muscle and or which skill sets would actually give me an advantage in this space to really double down on? What would you say to that?   I'll just lean on what I personally did. And I think that that's public speaking. So it's a lot, it's something that people hate, right? Like most people hate it. There's a small percentage of people that love it. Not very many. Most people say it's their biggest fear. Certainly my biggest fear was public speaking. so I had to overcome that. I realized that in order to be the person that I wanted to be, I needed to overcome that fear. I needed to get good at what I was not good at. And that was certainly it. And I'll tell you what.   doing what we're doing now helped me. So I launched a podcast. It helps a lot. You get used to talking, you get used to conversating with people and you being the center of attention and focusing your thoughts and putting them into the words that you want to say. And it, it really helped. And I think that that goes from the top down. So even if you, you know, public speaking, you're thinking about, you know, being on stage and giving a presentation, that sort of thing.   Just gonna say.   Ruben Kanya (42:34.914) but it trickles down all the way to networking conversations, to having a phone call with an investor. Like it just improves your conversation skills and your communication skills that you have, whether you're on stage, whether you're on a podcast or whether you're on a phone call or a face-to-face meeting with an investor, it trickles all the way down.   I love this conversation so much and Seth, you have your own podcast as well. Why don't you plug it in for a second.   Sure, it's called the Passive Income Attorney podcast, but I will say that I'm rebranding to Raise the Bar Radio. Obviously a homage to raising capital and being an attorney.   Right. No, the reason I bring that is I couldn't, I just want to echo that, that, everything is, is, is a, is a building block, right? I think what's fascinating about having your own show, right? Seth is, you know, that when someone is talking, traditionally, or if you're not well trained, you're already thinking the next thing to say, not really hearing the person. This skillset right here, but we're doing, which I love so much, you know, forces you to be a better listener.   You know be able to collect information Digest it analyze it and then respond to it. I've always said I think having a show a podcast is one of the ultimate hacks because of the the the There's just so many multiple benefits associated with it. I'm curious. Do you see it that way too? Or is it just me?   Ruben Kanya (44:06.798) just 100 % man 100 % you heard me man like that it's a game changer I mean there's that's to me the number one thing but also you you just get to make connections too right like you get to have guests that you have to have a reason to have somebody on your show that maybe you wouldn't get to talk to for whatever reason or and you get to cross paths with people and you get to say you get to share this experience like we're always gonna have this experience I know when I meet up with people in real life   maybe five years later, like at a networking event, I'm like, my gosh, you remember we were I was on your podcast four years ago or whatever. And it's just like, you know, it's like we're high school buddies or something. you know,   You know, that's so funny you say that Seth, because I was at a conference and I've seen this dude and it had been so long. He's awesome. And I blanked on his name and I was like, but I like, hadn't seen me yet. So I just went to my episode, scrolled them like that's right. Cause I couldn't put it together. I'm like, why am I playing on it? And we hit it off. went to lunch together. Like it was just awesome. But it's to your point, it's, it's sharing an experience one.   It's learning how to communicate, learning how to listen, and then being able to... That's why I actually like being on this side more, because I get to ask you questions. It's having a master class. I'm learning so much right now, and then I get to share with my audience. It's like, Roman, that was just a great interview. like, dude, I self-interest. I selfishly was just as hyped. I'm so glad you got value out of it. So that's awesome, Seth. Let me ask you. So, know, biggest...   You talked about the capital raising, challenging, having grit, needing grit, having a network, having money, having relationships. On the other side of this is, ah, this isn't for me. Do you have a message for those folks who are saying, you know, if you're an advocating for it and obviously you have a service around it, you've done it yourself. Sure. It's not for everybody.   (Seth Bradley) (46:14.178) Right, but for someone out there who's not thinking this right like I think I was in a meetup There was a gentleman out like 300 something units like single-family homes. I think I think you did it the old-fashioned way old gentleman I'm like, yeah, I'm like damn. what is it? What message you have to like share as far as I? Like pulling on levers, right? That's why a lot of us get into real estate levers being anyone resources capital social capital, etc Can you?   Just give us your take on this lever and the power it has. And if someone's not thinking of this, the power it can have. I you mentioned 120 million in 2022. Like help us understand and grasp that for someone who's thinking still like, oh, I'm going to just refinance. I'm going to flip this home and I'm going to OPM. How important is that?   It's so important. Like I said, it's scale, right? It's scale and speed. And that applies to any business that you're trying to scale. It's speed. Like, can you get there on your own or maybe finding one partner at a time? A lot of times that's where you start. Like if you're fixing and flipping homes, you get to a max and you're like, I'm going to bring in, you know, Joe Shimo or my brother-in-law and they're going to fund this one deal. And you're doing one house at a time, or maybe you're doing two houses and you're doing three, but that takes time.   I mean, it just takes a lot of time to get there. So you're just going to be going like this. Maybe you're going to keep improving and then you're going to have one bad deal and it'll be chopped back down a little bit and they're to keep going. But with other people's money, you go like this, like that you get vertical and you can get, and you can just get economies of scale. can, again, just go with speed and that's what matters in business. Now, maybe that's not for everyone. I do get that. Like, I think if you would have asked me a few years ago, I would have said, this is the only way.   Like this is the only way you have to do it. I don't know if it's necessarily for everyone, but if you do want to get to that next level and you want to get there fast, like you want to achieve it soon, then other people's money is where it's at. Like you have to use it like gasoline on a fire.   (Seth Bradley) (48:21.678) Tell us about the, I recently heard Alex Formozzi say this, and I think he was talking about how people need to realize that a piece of a watermelon is always gonna be greater than a large grass, like grapes or something like that. I was like, oh, that's a very interesting analogy. Can you break down maybe just for us who are not familiar with the split?   when you're raising capital and you have other people's money in play and you know a lot of people talk about assets under management here and there millions here and there but help us understand like what's what's the what's the ratio you helped a lot of clients if someone's a GP on a hundred million dollar deal or a ten million dollar deal how much are they actually taking home right like how much do I make because you know you see a lot even on social like   I think that's very interesting for us because you know, we got into the space and we're super lean, but at the same time our margins are ridiculous and it's not about how many doors someone how much profit we make per each, you know, property with all these insurance companies who are paying us like five X what you would traditionally pay. So it's never been about a door contest for us, but that's very prevalent in the industry. Like, we got assets on a management, you know, 20 million here, 120 million. But how much would one.   for someone who's listening, or maybe you're not thinking, said pour gasoline on it, how much am I actually taking home, let's say on a $100 million raise, or on a 20 million, 10 million? What's the good ratio? Like what am I making? And then what's the upside of that? And why is it beneficial for me to really pay attention to this? Especially if I am for profit and money driven, and I understand the opportunity that might be at stake here.   For sure, man. And you're kind of opening up a can of worms, right? So we'll see where we take this. the general idea here is you're actually not allowed to raise capital without a license. So just like being a doctor or a dentist or an attorney, you have to have a license to be able to raise capital. And it's called a broker dealer or potentially an RIA, a registered investment advisor. So if you're not one of those people, if you don't have a license, you need to have an exemption from having   Ruben Kanya (50:41.814) that license. Now, if it's your, this is speaking in generalities, but if it's your own deal, if it's your own fund, if it's your own syndication, if you're the one buying the property, that's an exemption. You're exempted. You can raise capital for your own deal and that's okay. And that's kind of the co-GP concept that we talk about sometimes. I actually don't like to say co-GP because to me it's a fallacy. There's no such thing as a co-GP. You're either a GP and an active partner.   or you're not. And what's a co GP. So we call co GPS or the way that the industry tends to frame them as kind of these small capital raisers, right, these small capital raisers that come in and raise a little bit of capital, and they don't participate in the deal in any other way. So they don't provide any services, they don't do any of   I got got I got rich friends Right you call me you say Ruben. Can you code GP this? know you can probably bring us an extra 50 million to the table Co GP or you're saying is actually not kosher   It depends. So it all depends on how you structure that deal. So if you're bringing a large amount of capital and you're only bringing capital, what you're going to want to do is negotiate managerial or voting rights within that legal entity that you're partnering with. So maybe they're the operating partner and you're the capital partner. And that's okay. So long as you as the capital partner have some sort of like meaningful voting and managerial rights. So that's kind of what private equity does, right? They come in, they raise capital.   And that's all they do is provide capital. But guess what? In those legal documents, if something goes wrong, let's say with the property or whatever the asset is, they have takeover rights. They can come in and manage the property and take over the asset management if they want to. Those rights are baked into the legal documentation. And that's what makes it okay, because they are an active partner because they have those managerial and or voting rights. But when you come in as a, let's say a smaller partner, and all you're doing is bringing in capital,   Ruben Kanya (52:41.1) and you're not doing anything else. So you haven't negotiated any meaningful rights to make decisions or to manage. you don't actually manage the asset. You don't actually attend the meetings. You don't do anything except, here's my 500,000 bucks from my investors. And then you walk away. That's actually not legal. And a lot of people call that the Code GP model. But actually, you're either an active partner in the deal or you're not.   Would it change Seth if I, it sounds like what you're saying is I'm bringing 500K and then I'm just leaving. I'm just like, here you go. Here's, I'm just hooking you up. Would that change if I put my own money into the deal? Now I'm an LP or no, there's more complicated.   Now you're, yeah, now you're an LP because it's your money. So you're just an investor.   Right. you're saying I could, yeah. So you're saying the difference between the example you just gave is the fact that that person never had money in, they just brought money in. That's none of their own money. And then they didn't do anything. You're saying that's a red flag for lack of better words, if they don't have the proper, I guess, voting rights, manager rights, et cetera. Is that an accurate recap?   Yeah, I can use my own capital. I can put my own half a million dollars into somebody's deal and be a passive investor. And that's okay. I'm not raising capital. That's my capital. But if I said, okay, here's $250,000 from my mom and $50,000 from Rubin and another $100,000 from this person and that person. And I put it in a LLC or I just bring them into the deal. Then that is raising capital. You're raising capital from other people. And that's, that's the difference there.   (Seth Bradley) (54:14.254) Yeah, so it's almost like you could be stacking, you know, people are a bunch of people are recruiting for the fund, but those folks are not on there as investors. It's aggregated funds, essentially, which could create a problem, right? Is that what you're saying? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Very interesting. I never even thought of that case study. Yeah.   Yeah, I didn't even ask your question though, which was how much money can you make? Right? So typically, typically, and again, we're putting securities laws aside here. We're just talking about kind of industry norms, we'll call it. Maybe 30 % or so is put aside for the capital raising. So 30 % of the GP. let's say there's a syndication where you do a 70 30 split, 70 % goes to the investors, 30 % goes to the general partners. Well,   If you bring in, let's say, 100 % of the equity, you bring in all of it, then you'll probably be allocated about 30 % of the general partnership. So 30 % of the 30 % in that example. So you get 9 % of the deal.   What did you mean by 100 % of the equity amount following?   So if you had to raise, let's say you're closing on a $10 million property and you need to raise $4 million to close it, or let's say the down payment plus capital improvements, something like that, and you bring in the full $4 million, you brought in 100 % of the equity needed to close the deal.   Ruben Kanya (55:38.574) Yep. And then overall, so and then what has happened now? So what's going on now or what's happened over the last couple of years is that there have been some very well-known syndicators in the space get investigated by the SEC and people have said, all right, well, now we need to figure out a different way to raise capital, compliantly. Right. And the answer is actually always been out there, but it's had some difficulties and that's a fund to fund. So   people out there, they've heard of a fund to fund. This is more a more prominent way, a more compliant way to raise capital nowadays. But I'll tell you what, comparing it to the CoGP model, it's more complicated. It costs more money and it's just a lot more work for you as the capital aggregator or the fundraiser. So people have avoided it because they've just done the CoGP model because it's easier. But now that the CoGP model isn't as available, people are still doing it, but people are kind of shying away from it because of the   the investigations that went on. Fund to Fund has become a lot more prominent and you have companies like Tribe Best who I'm chief legal officer for, full disclosure. We put together a Fund to Fund product where we make it cheaper, easier, more compliant, and you can just do it very easily and within five business days because we do everything for you. So instead of you having to find a securities attorney and a CPA, open a business banking account, file your LLC,   Walk your investors through the signing ceremony and get them to wire your funds. We call that herding the cats. Do all these things and put your cap table together, do your distributions, all those things that you'd normally have to do. Tribe Best does. And we do it for a very low price in comparison to what I would charge you if you came to me as a law client.   Interesting so I like how you just covered the foundation there. Let's go back to the 10 million dollar example, right? Yeah, you put in equity is you said so this is me saying Equity to close is 4 million. And so I'm bringing in 4 million just so I'm clear is do I have and this is my assumption that a Lot of syndicators are also raising the capital for that 4 million. Is that not correct?   Ruben Kanya (57:55.032) Typically, yes.   Okay, so then you're saying, just want to make sure I understand all the different use cases. So I could be 4 million and then the Delta, I can either traditional lending and or have my investors cover the Delta, which would be the 6 million. Is that accurate?   Yeah, I mean you can find however you need to fill in that the debt the equity stack Well wouldn't be the equity stack the full capital stack. Yeah   Typical though, it more typical that if I'm the GP to $10 million asset that I'm actually going to raise, I don't know, $3.5 million and put 500K on my own money? Is that more typical than I'm...   I would say that is typical. Yep. That is more typical. would say prime example idea, $10 million property, get a $6 million, maybe a little bit more, $6, $7 million loan. And then you raise three or $4 million, whether that's from passive investors or whether that's your own capital that you put in, or maybe you bring in fund to fund investors.   (Seth Bradley) (59:02.478) Okay, so that's where I wanted to ask the question, fund to fund. Tell me how that's different than the, bring in 3.5, I bring in 500K to the table, I raised 3.5, now I have a $4 million down payment, we borrow $6 million on debt. Tell me how the fund to fund is different than that approach.   Sure. So that deal that you just described, we like to call that when we're talking it with respect to fund to funds, the target deal. So that's the target deal. Like that's the entity and the structure that's buying the asset. So they're buying this $10 million asset. We're actually at the fund to fund level, one level down from there. So we create our own legal structure, our own LLC, and you have your own manager, a fund manager who brings in their own passive investors and they put them in that fund to fund legal entity.   And then the fund of fund legal entity actually invests into the target deal. So they come into the target deal as basically a big passive investor. let's say they aggregate a half a million dollars where typically, you know, the average investor might be $50,000. So these are bigger investors. It's just one big investor to the lead sponsor or the target deal, but it's really, yeah, it's really another fund is what it is. So it's a fund of a fund or a fund of a syndication.   That is so interesting. so you're saying that is becoming more prevalent. You fund a fund. I mean, I would imagine that's where not to get so far off topic, but that's where a lot of big companies who are deploying their excess capital or investing in. I I guess it's in multiple portfolios, right? Investing, right? mean, there's commercial, there's insurance. I mean, there's so many different things you can invest your money into.   Yes.   (Seth Bradley) (01:00:46.656) Is that all fun to fun families essentially?   For sure. For sure. Yeah. You know, you can call it a fund. There's different kinds of fund to funds. Fund funds aren't new. They've just been deployed in a different way recently or more prominently or more often, which is this kind of this I'll call it. We like to call it an SPV fund to fund single purpose vehicle fund to fund. Now other people will call it that same thing and mean something different, but the way that we mean it is that we create this fund to fund entity.   And it's a single purpose vehicle, meaning it's created only to invest in one deal. So that $10 million multifamily deal, we create a fund of an SPV fund of fund only to invest in that one

Title:  How Survive When Real Estate Deals Fail with Ruben Kanya Summary: In this conversation, Seth Bradley, a securities attorney and real estate investor, discusses the complexities of capital raising, the importance of experimentation in finding one's niche, and the critical role of networking and trust in the investment landscape. He shares insights from his journey in real estate and tech, emphasizing the need for grit and public speaking skills to succeed in capital raising. The discussion also highlights the challenges of the first capital raise and the lessons learned along the way. In this conversation, the speakers delve into the multifaceted benefits of hosting a podcast, emphasizing the importance of listening and connection. They explore the intricacies of capital raising in real estate, discussing the significance of grit, networking, and leveraging other people's money. The dialogue also covers compliance with securities laws, compensation structures in syndication, and the emerging trend of fund to fund structures. Tribevest is introduced as a solution for simplifying fund management and ensuring compliance in capital raising efforts. Links to listen and subscribe: https://podcasts.apple.com/ph/podcast/raising-capital-the-right-way-compliance-funds-and/id1341895972?i=1000688593916 Links to watch and subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyF9Z72m2R0 Bullet Point Highlights: You need a license to raise capital legally. Experimenting with different models helps identify what works for you. Building authority and trust is essential in capital raising. Networking with high net worth individuals is crucial. The first capital raise is often the hardest. Grit and determination are key to success in entrepreneurship. Public speaking skills can enhance your ability to communicate effectively. Learning from clients can provide valuable insights for your own journey. You can leverage your existing skills to add value in capital raises. Building a strong network can facilitate easier capital raising. Having a podcast enhances listening skills and fosters connections. Capital raising requires grit, a strong network, and resources. Leveraging other people's money accelerates business growth. Compliance with securities laws is crucial in capital raising. Compensation structures in syndication vary based on deal size and type. Fund to fund structures are becoming more prevalent in real estate. Effective communication is key to successful networking. Tribevest simplifies the process of raising capital compliantly. Understanding the legalities of capital raising is essential for success. Building a community can expedite personal and professional growth. Transcript: Ruben Kanya (00:00.142) whole idea here is you're actually not allowed to raise capital without a license. So just like being a doctor or a dentist or an attorney, you have to have a license to be able to raise capital and it's called a broker dealer or potentially an RIA, registered investment advisor. So if you're not one of those people, if you don't have a license, you need to have an exemption from having that license. if it's your, this is speaking in generalities, but if it's your own deal, if it's your own fund,   If it's your own syndication, if you're the one buying the property, that's an exemption. You're exempted. You can raise capital for your own deal and that's okay. And that's kind of the co-GP concept that we talk about sometimes. I actually don't like to say co-GP because to me it's a fallacy. There's no such thing as a co-GP. You're either a GP and an active partner.   Who's this? you're an entrepreneur? you're a real estate investor? you're trying to learn from those who did it? Well, come into the lab then. Put your white coat on, gloves on, notepad, and let's go, Joe.   Experiment nation this episode was a really fun one with Seth Bradley who is a fun manager Invest in entrepreneurs. He's an attorney he as a startup founders of software as a service and Really what I loved about What he's built is   Everything that he's built, it's vertically integrated, which I love, but he really embodies the principles of experimenting. Right. And what I mean by that is he has tried multiple models in real estate, which allowed him to get exposure, which I think is really important when I talk about having a well-rounded experiment in your lab, LabAK being your life, so that you can at least identify   (Seth Bradley) (02:10.529) what you like, what you don't like, what gives you return on energy, what drains you. I think those are all important things for us to then be able to niche down. A lot of times we talk about niching down, but we haven't even gotten a taste of what's on the menu to even understand what it is that we want to niche down in. And so part of what I created here at Experimentation in the lab is to bring you   folks who can present the menu of the different options that there is in not only real estate, but in business and even career to then give you that exposure so that you can then get a taste even from this show and then implement it yourself and maybe try one or two or three experiments or four or five. How many it takes for you to feel like this is the thing. This is the thing that I'm going to hold on to and grasp to and go all in on. Right. And that's what we did.   And keep in mind that life has seasons. A lot of us can do something and it could be four seasons. Your season could be five years, 10 years, 15, but I do believe in the compound effect. his journey, Seth's journey, he was able to get his first duplex, then quads, then small multifamilies and big multifamily units. And the next thing you know, he's doing $120 million a deal just in 2022 alone, right? In one year.   But with that, one thing I wanted to highlight, so one thing is the experiment, different exposures, AKA building blocks towards the very thing that he's doing now. But the other thing is being able to get a free, or I should say, get a paid internship. And that's through servicing your clients, learning from them, and then taking a page from their book. He was an attorney that was putting down together his SEC deals of syndications,   capital raising, and then he learned from his clients because he had full transparency. Sometimes, often we're in a position where the proof of concept is right in front of us, but we don't grab it by the horns. We just see it for what it is, just clocking and clocking out. No matter what job you have, there's an opportunity for you to actually take lessons, systems, SOPs, structure, any skillset to take it to the next level for your own endeavors.   (Seth Bradley) (04:38.252) And what I mean by that is I was a realtor and I was a realtor for the investor. understood how investors, underwrote their deals. And that was my win for me to hone my craft in real estate, underwriting deals, pulling comps, walking properties, understanding value at all. That was when I was the realtor for the investor. You can still look it up on bigger pockets. You can still see my page. That's what I was doing. I was helping investors invest until I then became an investor myself.   And in this case, he was an ICC attorney providing these, you know, going through the process of doing syndications, fund to fund, et cetera. And then he learned and he said, not only do I have a practice that does it, but I can also be on the other side of that transaction. So don't you ever forget the importance of being on the other side of the transaction in whatever service that you offer, even if it's just call it.   You work in hospitality at a restaurant to make ends meet. There's a system, there's a SOP, there's a checklist. There's something in there that is a proof of concept that you can then take and implement somewhere in your business. And the universe will tell you its secrets if you listen. The clues are all around us. Last but not least, I love our conversation around being an authority, building a brand.   Essentially, that's what capital raising is and he talked about three pillars. I don't want to talk about he said money Right is one heart of the center trust in your network, right? Your network is you gotta have a big network He talks about having a platform like this where I think everybody should have a podcast because you get the interview you get to learn the skills of communication listening, etc but most importantly you foster relationship while on the air and then   It builds trust to whoever's listening. I'm sure that if you're listening right now and you and I wanted to go into a deal together, there's some form of trust. If this is not your, your first episode. So there's that, right? We talked about having a meetup, restarting our meetups. That's key. Connecting people, they trust in you. Being an authoritative figure, trust. They can't flow you if they don't know you. So stop being cute and stop hiding and put yourself out there. Right? Money. Money follows all of the above network and trust.   (Seth Bradley) (07:00.408) people who have money in your network will make it easier than those who are in your network who are broke. So surround yourself with people who have money, not just because they have money, but of course it can help you tremendously if you're trying to raise capital. And there's something that goes about saying with people who have money, it's not that they're better or anything, but there is a level of opulence and abundance.   And I think there should be a good balance. But certainly if you're trying to raise money with people who don't have money and you're in a circle, people don't know how many doesn't mean to say that you can't uplift them when you have an opportunity, but it's going to be hard to raise capital from people who don't have capital. Right. So that's one thing to keep in mind. Money trust network and being an authority. You can build an authority from home in the lab, in a studio, in person.   And you don't always have to be an expert in something else. Sometimes you can actually have authority within your own circle. If you're a dentist and you're trying to raise capital with other dentists, they trust you. You have authority maybe in your current marketplace, you're a manager of some kind or you're a lead or you're just someone that people really trust. You have that authority. You have trust already with like-minded people in your circle. So this was a great one. He brought a lot of core values home. And that's what I love about   the show. It's every time you listen or anytime you interview someone who's had done some amazing leaps and experiments in their own lab, there's always some consistent clues that kind of bring to the surface and maybe it just, I'm aware of them, but if not, my goal is to extract that and make them aware for you. So I trust that you're going to get a lot from this episode without further ado, Seth Bradley in the lab, y'all.   Experimentation, what's going on? Your host Ruben here. Today I have the pleasure of connecting with a gentleman that we connected with, had some mutual connections. And I was like, I didn't want to let the serendipity go to waste because I saw there was a mutual beneficial component to the lab, as I always say. And I always think you're as good as your tools, you're as good as your resources. And so I'm really happy to have the gentleman here step into the lab with us to give us insight. And I also love the   (Seth Bradley) (09:21.39) I'll call it a vertical integration I think and maybe Seth will keep me honest here, but without further ado I want to welcome Seth Bradley. How's it my man? Welcome to the lab brother   Going great, man. Ruben, really appreciate you having me on. Thanks for having me in the lab.   Absolutely, man. I should so listen if I'm curious so Seth because you know, we we start to talk a little bit and I was a car We're getting to the weeds of things. I want to make sure I hit this record button, but I'm just a curious guy and I'm so curious that if I'm at a real estate conference and you and I sit next to each other and I say hey I'm Ruben Seth. Nice to meet you. You know, what do you do for a living? What do you lead with because you have a very interesting background? So I want to we're gonna reverse engineer, but I'm so curious as to   at the time that we're recording this, what do you lead with if you don't know what my interests are, you don't know where I'm coming from, I could be an investor, I could be interested in putting my money to work, what do you lead with? I'm just so curious.   I love that question, man, because sometimes I have a hard time answering it. It's an easy question to answer for most people, but for me, I have to think about it for a second. But typically I'll lead with I'm a securities attorney, specifically a real estate securities attorney. So if you're raising capital for real estate from passive investors, I'm your guy. can help you put together your fund or your syndication compliantly and secondarily, or, you know, one B I'll call it a tech founder. So involved in a few tech startups as well.   (Seth Bradley) (10:48.238) That's awesome. Then that opens up the window because I see her tech founder and then I securities attorney. Is that that accurate?   Yep, nailed it.   securities attorney. would you do you happen to do you still do I mean, of course, you've been involved in raising capital yourself, which is what I want to lead with next. But are you actively investing? And if you are, what is the model? Is it more investing in the startup? Or is it more investing in actual capitals? I should say social capital relationships, or even you know what, maybe it's some form of real estate, what is your current I guess, investing   season for lack of better words.   Yeah, it's all across the board, man. mean, everything that you mentioned, I mean, just quickly, I started in real estate in 2013. House hacked into a duplex did kind of the bigger pockets podcast. Listen to that. Red Rich Dad, Poor Dad, you know, the typical journey you take and house hacked into a duplex and started buying bigger and bigger properties got to the point where, you know, I wanted to get into syndications and funds and start raising capital. So I started actually investing passively into real estate first and I got my feet wet.   Ruben Kanya (12:01.55) figured out what that investor journey looked like. And then I started raising capital myself from my own syndications where potentially I could be just a capital partner or also an operator. So I raised a good amount of capital from 2019 to 2023, I would say, before the interest rates started to spike. And then we slowed down a bit, but we still own a good amount of that real estate and just put it in perspective. We bought about $120 million with the real estate in 2022 alone. And now I'm kind of   involved with a handful of tech startups where I'm also in that same capacity where I'm raising capital or helping the CEO raise capital for seed rounds for these startups.   Okay, very interesting. So I'm glad let's go to the very beginning because you talked about bigger pockets with shout out to bigger pockets, right? Because that's or did you say bigger pockets? I did hear you say that. Okay, cool. had a mutual kind of, know, I was planning my seeds. I think that they did an amazing job, of course, like minded investors together. 2013 get a duplex. I'm sure one thing I'm curious about and you know, someone else might be listening is, you know, what   point now every everyone's situation is different with that said, but at what point did you start to think, okay, it's time to bring in some outside capital and, I'm going to lead with you. It seems that you strike me as a guy who does things strategically. enlighten me a little bit as to get the duplex. Was there another lever that was pulled to get the next property before you start to raise capital? Or is that right away, right into, okay, now it's time to raise capital. Cause   duplex going to take me so far. Tell me about that journey.   Ruben Kanya (13:43.732) No, I mean, that journey was, you know, a lot of different types of things. mean, I've wholesaled, I've fixed and flipped single family properties. We were doing that in Cleveland for a while. Then we kind of moved on to multifamily, you know, smaller multifamilies up to four units, which is still residential, but then up to, you know, like 16 units, those sorts of things. Then we started getting to where, you know, capital starts getting constrained, your own capital, or if you're doing like a JV, starts getting constrained. But I was fortunate enough that my legal practice, which also started in 2013,   was highly related to what I was doing. So as a real estate attorney, my real estate clients were raising capital for their real estate deals. So then I got into securities law. So I saw how they were raising capital. Then I started helping them raise capital from the legal side. And then I started raising, and then I realized that, hey, if we want to go bigger, I've got to be more like my clients who are buying, you know, 50, $100 million properties. How do we do that? Well, like they do it. They need to raise capital from either   passive investors or from, larger investors like family offices and places like that. So I knew that that was the pathway. So I was fortunate enough to kind of have that perspective shown to me by my clients and they kind of showed me the blueprint. Hey, this is how you need to do it. Now, a lot of other attorneys see that same blueprint and they don't really have that entrepreneurial mindset. So they're kind of just like that service oriented, Hey, let's do what I'm doing. And I'm just going to help. But I have an entrepreneurial mindset. I I'm like,   I want to do that. I want to buy that property. I want to run that business. I want to scale it. like anything else, though, I still had a little bit of reservation, I would say. So I decided to invest passively first just to get my feet wet, just to see what that investor experience was like. And then once I did that a few times, I really got into the active side and dove right in.   Oh man, I love so many elements of that. Let's unpack the experiment phase, right? Because that's what I truly believe in. I'm curious to what your thoughts are on this, right? Before I even preface by saying this, I think, and this is just a thought, could be wrong. I'm experimenting life as it is. But when you ask someone, hey, what do you want to do for a living? Right? It's like, well, I don't know. I haven't been exposed to enough.   (Seth Bradley) (16:03.116) Right. But then when you start experimenting with a lot of different things, then you can niche down because you've been exposed to like this that I don't like, et cetera. And there's a second leg to that, but I want to touch on that for a second because you said you did wholesale fixing flips, then you need small multifamily. What do you think you were able to gain from that? My personally, when I see that, I see, well, you were able you were able to get insight, but   Again, maybe you see things differently. Maybe it's like you needed to do those things and you thought it was true. And then you were led down one path and led to another. What do you take from that? Were you experimenting or was it more or less of the natural progression of events and what you thought was going to be your end all be all ended up progressing into a new ideal. Tell me about that experience.   Yeah, I mean, I think it was an experiment. It was me trying. I knew I wanted to be in real estate. I love real estate. I've always been drawn to it. It's just been an interesting thing for me and interesting subject. I remember when I was in undergrad and I couldn't afford to buy any kind of real estate or didn't have a job at all. And I was trying to figure out, well, man, how can I buy like these townhouses that I'm living in and rent those out? Like, I remember just being interested from the get go. So I knew I wanted to be in it, but it was certainly an experiment to see.   how to break into the market, how to scale a business. Because once you got into a duplex and your house hacked and bought a few other single family properties, it was like, okay, well, we can continue to do this, but I'm always looking again to scale. And to do that, a lot of times you do need to bring in other people's money to be able to fund that scale. But not always. mean, I think it would be a better pathway, honestly, if you can scale without other people's money, because then you can own 100 % of it. But a lot more difficult to do. So if you want to...   you want to grow with scale fast, typically it's with other people's money. And again, luckily I was already in a profession that gave me that experience to be able to see that pathway and be able to execute on   (Seth Bradley) (18:02.35) Now tell me that's a great insight or at least a transition point there, Seth, because we, know, in our professions, we spend a lot of time, but not a lot of folks spend the time to have the lens of an entrepreneur to say, hey, maybe I can actually take a page from their book. Right. Because I think it's interesting that it's we all are entrepreneurs. Right. So we go into business ourselves to run away from maybe possibly corporate. Some people.   And then we build our own companies. We install systems, we invest in resources. And then it's like, we turn into the thing that we were maybe running away from, but there's a lesson that we get to build it our way and have maybe learned lessons from these big corporations. In your end, it reminds me a little bit of me because I again, certainly not an attorney by any means. And I won't compare being a realtor to an attorney, but you are servicing clients and you get to at least,   at least get nuggets from their journey and then say, Hey, why don't, why don't I take a page from their book? Can you talk to us about that? Because I think honestly, it's an unkept almost secret and not even talked about enough where it's like, Hey, you're taking this opportunity right now to get to understand the playbook, see how they've done it, learn from their mistakes, right? Right. Through service and while getting paid. And then you're like, okay, now I'm going to do it for me. So   Do you see it that way as well? was it kind of, know, or did you strategically go into it thinking that you do that? Or it was kind of like, you know what? This is kind of cool. Let me try it myself.   Yeah, I mean, and Ruben, hats off to you, man, because a lot of realtors and brokers, they're around real estate every single day. That is literally their business. They have access to deals before other people. They get to see things that other people don't get to see. They get to see the transactions. They get to see how they change hands. And as you know, most of them don't invest in real estate. like, you even own your own house? Do you own any investment properties in...   Ruben Kanya (20:11.918) 90 % of them don't, right? Unless it's, well, maybe their own house, but that's probably it. They don't invest. And it's crazy to think about that when they're around that all the time. And it's the same thing with attorneys, right? Like, know, they're, whether there's somebody like me, there's real estate or securities, and they have clients that are, that are buying large properties and raising capital, or it's, you know, some other practice like and A where they're combining companies and building companies and things like that.   I think that there's a certain entrepreneurial DNA that's in some of us and it's not in others. And that's okay. Like some people thrive in an office atmosphere or thrive in a W-2 type of atmosphere. And a lot of times I don't even like to disrupt that. Like people, you know, are comfortable there. They like the steady paycheck and that's okay. And I think the vast majority of people do want that and they do like that. They like the predictability of it. But some of us out there, like me and you, I believe are, you know, we just,   We're not a fit for that. Like we need to build. I think that's the key is, is the build, right? Cause you were talking about, you know, we start putting all the systems and the processes and the things into place to ultimately end up in the, the same machine that we didn't want to work for. But I don't think that's the piece that's important. The piece is important is that that climb the build, we want to build like we were builders. love to build.   Yeah. Have you ever had a conversation, with maybe your associates on? I don't know if this is a hypocritical question, because I don't know if I could answer this. But I'm curious, have you had a conversation with another attorney? Like, hey, you see this all the time. Have ever thought of doing it yourself? What's the mindset behind? Have you had that conversation? And have you had around those? Yeah, just curious.   Yeah, I definitely, I definitely have. think, you know, at least specifically with the attorney industry or with that profession, we are, we're trained to look at risk. We're trained to evaluate liability. We are trained to be conservative in nature. and that is totally different than when you're an entrepreneur and you're out there building a business and you're, don't know what tomorrow is going to bring. And there's going to be a problem that pops up today that you didn't expect.   Ruben Kanya (22:30.01) And you don't know if you're going to be able to pay payroll and all these different things that come up as an entrepreneur, as a business builder, that's totally a different mindset than it is that attorneys are trained for. So I think that's definitely a separation. like, you know, I have a lot of investors that are attorneys. That was, that's who my investor base is. Typically it's other attorneys. A lot of other capital raisers don't go after attorneys because they are paying the ass. We ask a lot of questions. Like I said, we are risk averse. Like, you know, we're not the ideal.   person or people to raise from.   I'm gonna predict my money isn't really the case.   with a cold on the page. 137 second paragraph line four. What does that mean? Why is that? And, know, that's the kind of stuff you have to deal with. But, you know, they do make a good amount of money. So there's a, you know, there's a push, there's a give take there. But, you know, I think that that's, I have identified that with conversations with my investors and obviously my prior colleagues. I mean, that in itself is, is a big difference.   It's a big difference. We're just as attorneys, we're just trained to find and look at risk and think about all the bad things that can happen. And man, when you're building a business, when you're growing out on your own and you say, I'm done with my W-2, I don't want that paycheck anymore. That's a lot of risk, right? Or at least it's a lot of risk to a person that thinks that way. I actually don't think that way. I think it's more risky to be have one income stream and be a W-2, but that's certainly not the way that they typically look at it.   (Seth Bradley) (24:02.306) Yeah, no, it's interesting what you're saying. But I'm also curious though, that if they are also investing, because it sounds like you've also worked with some associates, or at least your investors have come from the same cloth, it sounds like they might be, instead of again, raising the capital like you are, high risk, high leverage, they're willing to put their money to work. Do you find that   And I guess maybe that's it. Do you find that that kind of archetype is finding that to be of a less riskier approach versus flipping versus doing it themselves? Or do you find that it's more of time constraint thing? it's like, listen, I got the money. You mentioned it. I have a high net worth. I'm an accredited investor. Let me just do it with someone who's an expert. What have you seen since you've been on both sides, and especially as a fundraiser?   Yeah, I think it's that investor profile. You know, these are folks that make a lot of money from their W-2. They have no time on their hands because their W-2 is so demanding. then any time they have outside of that, it's got to be spent with family. So they really just don't have any time, but they do have capital. So it's just that investor profile that you're dealing with with attorneys and some of the similar, you know, with doctors and dentists and engineers and people like that. Same thing. You know, they're highly paid professionals.   You know, they went to school for a long time. They make a lot of money, but they don't have any time. And unless they really want to venture out and say, okay, I want to raise capital or, or, I don't know, you have to figure out a way to carve out more time because they certainly don't have it. I know when I worked in big law firms and I'm trying to bill 2000 hours a year, I don't have time to, you know, invest actively. In fact, I actually got fired from my big law job, my last one, because of that, because I'm raising capital and doing real estate deals.   and starting businesses and guess what? You don't have time to do that if you're working at a demanding job, whether that's as an attorney or Dr. Dennis, whoever that might be. So I think it just comes down to that profile and do you have time? Do you have capital? And then whatever one you have a surplus of, that's probably where you're going to fit into the asset. So you can invest if you have capital and no time.   Ruben Kanya (26:26.126) You need to find something a little bit more passive and that comes through like funds and syndications and things like that.   All right. So that's very helpful and I think very interesting because you've seen both sides. You not only were on the other side, but you've also been the capital raiser and then you've also yourself invested passively. Tell me about the first deal that if you recall, at least the like kind deal when you raised capital, who did you go to?   Did you start with your client base? Did you start with friends and family? And then maybe we can even get into the granularity. I know there's different non-accredited, accredited 506V versus 506C. There's a lot of different kind of foundational pillars. But talk to us about what your first deal was like, if you recall some of the numbers and what kind of asset type and then who you actually pulled in. So people can start thinking of actually what's possible when we talk about capital.   you know, in fundraising, we think of it as this big thing, but people like you and me can actually start initiating these kinds of transactions. Talk to us about your first one.   Yeah, man, I mean, don't remember the actual specifics, but it was like 100 because there's around 150 unit multifamily something like that was your first That was the first raise it was the first raise but I was brought I I wasn't the primary operating partner I brought in as a capital raiser that sort of thing and also providing some legal services as well. Um, but I was   (Seth Bradley) (27:48.078) That was your first race.   (Seth Bradley) (28:01.422) Hold on. That's interesting. Now you kind of you're kind of double. Is that is that how you got your general partner essentially? Were you a general partner on that? Or were you tell us about that? Because from what I understand, you can correct me if I'm wrong here. You're the expert. You can bring in different subject matter expertise to the table to value your I guess your position and a capital raise. Maybe one is investor relations, one, et cetera. Did you from what I understand, bacon?   some of your services and as a GP or is that, what did you?   Yeah, for sure. Yeah. I was a general partner on that deal, baking in some of my legal services as well. Started leveraging my skillset that's super valuable. Obviously, it's applicable to these capital raises. I can help you raise capital and also be the securities attorney and also potentially the real estate attorney as well on the deal. So lots of different ways that I can get in there and provide value to the active partnership.   But yeah, I I was tasked with raising, you know, half a million dollars. I didn't hit it. I hit way under. I think I might've raised like a couple hundred thousand dollars. And I was pretty happy that I even hit that because it's the first time. I'm, and I'll tell you what, man, like capital raising is hard. Like I think that, you know, you see all these masterminds out there and these coaching programs and things and they're teaching how to raise capital and some are great. And I'm actually in a couple of them. but they are, you know, they, have to sell you on that. easy, right? They have to sell you on, Hey,   I'll give you the systems, the processes and boom, you're going to be able to raise a million dollars easily. It's not that easy. unless you already have a built in network of high net worth individuals, that's where you'll find success. Or maybe you have a platform like yours where you can access a lot of people that you already have a relationship with and you'll like, and trust you that love what you're doing. And they're like, man, if he's investing in this, it must be good. So that those people, like you, and then also people that are.   Ruben Kanya (29:59.426) we tend to see a lot of doctors and dentists that are very successful right out of the gate. Cause guess what? They work with other doctors and dentists who already trust them, who have money, who already trust them. So they do great. and then others, like me are probably somewhere in the middle, right? We we've got a base of investors that are like attorneys, which seem like they'd be great because they have money, but guess what? They're a pain in the ass. So there's, there's a little bit of give take there. and then you have other folks who,   you know, maybe they're a school teacher or something like that where their colleagues maybe don't have a ton of money to invest and they have to follow just like, you know, follow the processes, the systems and the marketing funnels and those things and rely really heavily on that. And typically it doesn't go that well. It doesn't on the first one. You've really got to be scrappy. Like you've got to get in there. You've got to literally make a list of a hundred people that you know, that might want to invest right.   type it up, go systematically through that list, and you've gotta break out of your shell and not be afraid to just reach out to these people, no shame, get your pitch together and just do it. And it feels awkward and you don't wanna do it and you feel like a salesperson, but you've gotta do it. You've gotta break through those reservations and make it happen because that first raise is a bear. You've gotta just be.   You've got to be scrappy and you've got to do whatever it takes and 10x whatever you think is going to take.   Experiment nation, you've heard me talk about how multiple investors across the nation are landing these lucrative midterm rental insurance contracts by making these small tweaks on the branding and marketing side, especially if you're an existing short-term rental operator, there is a quick and easy shift that you can make with the ride guide in place. And because we've launched a two-day bootcamp,   (Seth Bradley) (31:59.278) that not everyone could attend in real time, I've put together a recording where you can get all the materials and all the guides to focus on rebranding either your short term rental business or your current midterm rental business so that you can actually have the insurance companies reach out to you. And then day two is if you want to actually play offense, how you can reach out to them by listing on the right platforms, et cetera.   If you're looking to get this MTR bootcamp so that you can start optimizing and you can start receiving these lucrative contracts that again, provide less headaches, less turnovers, unlike the Airbnb space, you can start receiving inquiries today by having the right guide in place. So please go to experimentrealestate.com for slash MTR bootcamp or click the link in the bio to make sure you get your hands on the   and midterm rental insurance bootcamp to fast track your way into landing these lucrative insurance contracts the exact same ways multiple investors have taken advantage of this unknown and untapped niche within the midterm rental umbrella. Wow, so I'm a systems guy and as you're speaking, I'm taking notes here guys. I heard three key pillars and feel free to add to them because I wanna hear.   kind of the downfall of some of what folks are coaching. I heard one is money, number two is trust, and number three is network. And I like how you highlighted those because I hear, well, if you have a network and you can get access and you have a large pool, then there's probably people who are gonna have money in there. Then if you have what I'm hearing is authority, trust, AKA I'm a doctor, you're a doctor, we speak the same language. And by the way, guess what? Third pillar, we all have money.   So that's kind of like the sweet, sounds like that's the sweet spot. MTN money trust and network. What did I miss?   Ruben Kanya (34:03.89) You nailed it, man. That's it. That's kind of the big level, the high level things that you need. I mean, you need that authority or you need to be able to show that you know what you're doing, that you know what you talk about and what you're talking about, that sort of thing. And then obviously that network, you either have to develop that through your W-2 that you already have or however it might be, or maybe you have a platform, right? Like maybe you have a platform like a podcast or an investor group.   or an in-person meetup. We don't do those as much as we used to before COVID, but that used to be a huge thing. Like I were on a real estate meetup in San Diego County or something like that. And it goes, that used to go really, really well for people to be able to raise capital. So yeah, you gotta have that platform. Network. I know, right, Networking lunch.   You should bring that back. There's something about because there's something about this, right? This is cool. Like, what a time to be alive where you and I can connect in the flesh. But I want to echo what you just said. Because I'm kind of speaking to myself as a reminder, Ruben, you got to get these meetups going again. We used to do a meetup in New York and Atlanta.   And just the relationships that happen in the room and you're being the super connector is so powerful. I wouldn't get cute and just, you know, this is great that you and I can connect while you're in San Diego and I'm here in Boston, but it's not, or it's and, I think we should, I think we should bring it back. Cause I could tell it may a super charismatic dude, great energy. you know, obviously you're authoritative figure and I feel like, I think, it will only service more.   never seen.   (Seth Bradley) (35:41.87) to have these in there's something about in person. So yeah, I'm just I'm preaching to the choir, but I'm also like, hey, accountability, I'm gonna check up on you. gotta do the same.   You gotta appreciate it. Tell me sure man. And it's great. Like when we meet on something like this and we have some interactions on social media and then we get on each other's podcast, you know, get to know each other. And then when you meet in person, you're like, this is awesome. You already feel like you know the person. So technology is a great and right. Another and yeah.   Yeah, don't sleep on that fit that in person. We need more of that if anything. And people are, you know what, people I think are actually searching for it with all this technology. So good reminder for the both of us and whoever who's listening. I want to touch on something that you said, Seth. You mentioned, because I like learning from those who either have failed or made mistakes because can expedite our learning process. So you said,   First deal typically, uh first one doesn't go well, uh, it's a bear but then you also mentioned that uh, you know Some some mastermind programs, right and there's a lot out there good and bad and some are better than others. Uh, some of them, you know I see I guess uh, maybe Don't um, I should say, um, maybe they fall a little short   of helping you get to your first link. What's missing? What's the missing link? We talk about money, trust and network, but like if I wanted to nail it the first time the right way without, and I wanted to learn from someone like you from, your mistakes or from someone else's mistakes or from, know, those masterminds that are just falling short, what is a, is, is it a foundational or at least insight or lesson learn or thing I should keep top of mind in addition to the money, trust and network that would maybe put me in a   (Seth Bradley) (37:40.024) position not to have the first one be so challenging.   Yeah, I mean, to be honest with you, I think it's going to be challenging no matter what. I mean, I think what I was going to say is actually grit, right? You have to have grit. So I think it kind of it's a counterbalance here where you have a mastermind or coaching program or a class or something like that that you're selling to somebody. And the only way somebody is going to buy it is if you say, hey, buy this or come join me in this group and   I'll make it easy for you to do what you want to do. Like that's the selling point. You have to say that it's going to be easy to get them to pay you to do it. But the problem is once they're in, you realize it's not easy. So, you know,   People sell the promise, not the process.   That's right. That's right. So, you know, I think maybe I don't know if there's any way around that. Like you certainly can't sell it is going to be hard and be like, Hey, well, if you buy my $20,000 program, you're probably not going to make it. So you can, if you want, you know, it's just not, it's not going to work. So I don't know if that's going to change, but I would say maybe once you get into that program, then you preach that, look, I can give you the systems, I can give you the processes. I can even teach you the compliance and I can hook you up with all my different, you know, my network and   Ruben Kanya (38:59.21) hook you up with my securities attorney and my CPA and my funnel builder and those sorts of things. But at the end of the day, really emphasize that it's going to be work. You have to not only implement the systems, but you're going to have to scrap. Just like building any business, capital raising is a hard business and you're going to have to do things that are going to make you uncomfortable. And if you don't go all in, you're not going to make it. That's all there is. It's just like any business.   or even a piece of a business. So me and my wife own a few gyms together and like sometimes we'll implement like you know, a promotion or something. Right. And if we half asset, it doesn't work. It just doesn't. It simply does not work. You have to have full buy-in. You have to believe in it yourself and you have to get your teammates and your employees to believe in it or they won't or they won't grow in the same direction as you. You've got to be all in just like with any business or it's not going to work.   love that. That's a good one. The belief system is certainly a big one. And I'm sure it comes off across, especially in this space of capital raising, you people want to know that, do you believe in what you're saying, right? Just as much as you believe in yourself. That's interesting. So   Tactically, was talking to this gentleman yesterday at the gym, speaking of the gym, a young guy, a hustler, you know, making some good money. And we were kind of talking about, you know, journey, you know, part of the journey is, you know, acquiring skill sets and honing your and sharpening the axe, for lack of a better word. And so I'm curious, you know,   And I'm going to stick to my pillager because that's a reference point for me. But if I'm thinking of, what is one skill? Not saying for this is the end all be all by any means, just curses. If I was to focus and truly get really, really good at one skill and, can she not just achieve mastery in it? Is it fostering relationships, remembering Seth's birthday, what he does? Is it being able to really get   (Seth Bradley) (41:17.998) great at communication and putting together a pitch deck, just to get a little bit more granular of like, what skillsets should I be thinking of, of honing, flexing that muscle and or which skill sets would actually give me an advantage in this space to really double down on? What would you say to that?   I'll just lean on what I personally did. And I think that that's public speaking. So it's a lot, it's something that people hate, right? Like most people hate it. There's a small percentage of people that love it. Not very many. Most people say it's their biggest fear. Certainly my biggest fear was public speaking. so I had to overcome that. I realized that in order to be the person that I wanted to be, I needed to overcome that fear. I needed to get good at what I was not good at. And that was certainly it. And I'll tell you what.   doing what we're doing now helped me. So I launched a podcast. It helps a lot. You get used to talking, you get used to conversating with people and you being the center of attention and focusing your thoughts and putting them into the words that you want to say. And it, it really helped. And I think that that goes from the top down. So even if you, you know, public speaking, you're thinking about, you know, being on stage and giving a presentation, that sort of thing.   Just gonna say.   Ruben Kanya (42:34.914) but it trickles down all the way to networking conversations, to having a phone call with an investor. Like it just improves your conversation skills and your communication skills that you have, whether you're on stage, whether you're on a podcast or whether you're on a phone call or a face-to-face meeting with an investor, it trickles all the way down.   I love this conversation so much and Seth, you have your own podcast as well. Why don't you plug it in for a second.   Sure, it's called the Passive Income Attorney podcast, but I will say that I'm rebranding to Raise the Bar Radio. Obviously a homage to raising capital and being an attorney.   Right. No, the reason I bring that is I couldn't, I just want to echo that, that, everything is, is, is a, is a building block, right? I think what's fascinating about having your own show, right? Seth is, you know, that when someone is talking, traditionally, or if you're not well trained, you're already thinking the next thing to say, not really hearing the person. This skillset right here, but we're doing, which I love so much, you know, forces you to be a better listener.   You know be able to collect information Digest it analyze it and then respond to it. I've always said I think having a show a podcast is one of the ultimate hacks because of the the the There's just so many multiple benefits associated with it. I'm curious. Do you see it that way too? Or is it just me?   Ruben Kanya (44:06.798) just 100 % man 100 % you heard me man like that it's a game changer I mean there's that's to me the number one thing but also you you just get to make connections too right like you get to have guests that you have to have a reason to have somebody on your show that maybe you wouldn't get to talk to for whatever reason or and you get to cross paths with people and you get to say you get to share this experience like we're always gonna have this experience I know when I meet up with people in real life   maybe five years later, like at a networking event, I'm like, my gosh, you remember we were I was on your podcast four years ago or whatever. And it's just like, you know, it's like we're high school buddies or something. you know,   You know, that's so funny you say that Seth, because I was at a conference and I've seen this dude and it had been so long. He's awesome. And I blanked on his name and I was like, but I like, hadn't seen me yet. So I just went to my episode, scrolled them like that's right. Cause I couldn't put it together. I'm like, why am I playing on it? And we hit it off. went to lunch together. Like it was just awesome. But it's to your point, it's, it's sharing an experience one.   It's learning how to communicate, learning how to listen, and then being able to... That's why I actually like being on this side more, because I get to ask you questions. It's having a master class. I'm learning so much right now, and then I get to share with my audience. It's like, Roman, that was just a great interview. like, dude, I self-interest. I selfishly was just as hyped. I'm so glad you got value out of it. So that's awesome, Seth. Let me ask you. So, know, biggest...   You talked about the capital raising, challenging, having grit, needing grit, having a network, having money, having relationships. On the other side of this is, ah, this isn't for me. Do you have a message for those folks who are saying, you know, if you're an advocating for it and obviously you have a service around it, you've done it yourself. Sure. It's not for everybody.   (Seth Bradley) (46:14.178) Right, but for someone out there who's not thinking this right like I think I was in a meetup There was a gentleman out like 300 something units like single-family homes. I think I think you did it the old-fashioned way old gentleman I'm like, yeah, I'm like damn. what is it? What message you have to like share as far as I? Like pulling on levers, right? That's why a lot of us get into real estate levers being anyone resources capital social capital, etc Can you?   Just give us your take on this lever and the power it has. And if someone's not thinking of this, the power it can have. I you mentioned 120 million in 2022. Like help us understand and grasp that for someone who's thinking still like, oh, I'm going to just refinance. I'm going to flip this home and I'm going to OPM. How important is that?   It's so important. Like I said, it's scale, right? It's scale and speed. And that applies to any business that you're trying to scale. It's speed. Like, can you get there on your own or maybe finding one partner at a time? A lot of times that's where you start. Like if you're fixing and flipping homes, you get to a max and you're like, I'm going to bring in, you know, Joe Shimo or my brother-in-law and they're going to fund this one deal. And you're doing one house at a time, or maybe you're doing two houses and you're doing three, but that takes time.   I mean, it just takes a lot of time to get there. So you're just going to be going like this. Maybe you're going to keep improving and then you're going to have one bad deal and it'll be chopped back down a little bit and they're to keep going. But with other people's money, you go like this, like that you get vertical and you can get, and you can just get economies of scale. can, again, just go with speed and that's what matters in business. Now, maybe that's not for everyone. I do get that. Like, I think if you would have asked me a few years ago, I would have said, this is the only way.   Like this is the only way you have to do it. I don't know if it's necessarily for everyone, but if you do want to get to that next level and you want to get there fast, like you want to achieve it soon, then other people's money is where it's at. Like you have to use it like gasoline on a fire.   (Seth Bradley) (48:21.678) Tell us about the, I recently heard Alex Formozzi say this, and I think he was talking about how people need to realize that a piece of a watermelon is always gonna be greater than a large grass, like grapes or something like that. I was like, oh, that's a very interesting analogy. Can you break down maybe just for us who are not familiar with the split?   when you're raising capital and you have other people's money in play and you know a lot of people talk about assets under management here and there millions here and there but help us understand like what's what's the what's the ratio you helped a lot of clients if someone's a GP on a hundred million dollar deal or a ten million dollar deal how much are they actually taking home right like how much do I make because you know you see a lot even on social like   I think that's very interesting for us because you know, we got into the space and we're super lean, but at the same time our margins are ridiculous and it's not about how many doors someone how much profit we make per each, you know, property with all these insurance companies who are paying us like five X what you would traditionally pay. So it's never been about a door contest for us, but that's very prevalent in the industry. Like, we got assets on a management, you know, 20 million here, 120 million. But how much would one.   for someone who's listening, or maybe you're not thinking, said pour gasoline on it, how much am I actually taking home, let's say on a $100 million raise, or on a 20 million, 10 million? What's the good ratio? Like what am I making? And then what's the upside of that? And why is it beneficial for me to really pay attention to this? Especially if I am for profit and money driven, and I understand the opportunity that might be at stake here.   For sure, man. And you're kind of opening up a can of worms, right? So we'll see where we take this. the general idea here is you're actually not allowed to raise capital without a license. So just like being a doctor or a dentist or an attorney, you have to have a license to be able to raise capital. And it's called a broker dealer or potentially an RIA, a registered investment advisor. So if you're not one of those people, if you don't have a license, you need to have an exemption from having   Ruben Kanya (50:41.814) that license. Now, if it's your, this is speaking in generalities, but if it's your own deal, if it's your own fund, if it's your own syndication, if you're the one buying the property, that's an exemption. You're exempted. You can raise capital for your own deal and that's okay. And that's kind of the co-GP concept that we talk about sometimes. I actually don't like to say co-GP because to me it's a fallacy. There's no such thing as a co-GP. You're either a GP and an active partner.   or you're not. And what's a co GP. So we call co GPS or the way that the industry tends to frame them as kind of these small capital raisers, right, these small capital raisers that come in and raise a little bit of capital, and they don't participate in the deal in any other way. So they don't provide any services, they don't do any of   I got got I got rich friends Right you call me you say Ruben. Can you code GP this? know you can probably bring us an extra 50 million to the table Co GP or you're saying is actually not kosher   It depends. So it all depends on how you structure that deal. So if you're bringing a large amount of capital and you're only bringing capital, what you're going to want to do is negotiate managerial or voting rights within that legal entity that you're partnering with. So maybe they're the operating partner and you're the capital partner. And that's okay. So long as you as the capital partner have some sort of like meaningful voting and managerial rights. So that's kind of what private equity does, right? They come in, they raise capital.   And that's all they do is provide capital. But guess what? In those legal documents, if something goes wrong, let's say with the property or whatever the asset is, they have takeover rights. They can come in and manage the property and take over the asset management if they want to. Those rights are baked into the legal documentation. And that's what makes it okay, because they are an active partner because they have those managerial and or voting rights. But when you come in as a, let's say a smaller partner, and all you're doing is bringing in capital,   Ruben Kanya (52:41.1) and you're not doing anything else. So you haven't negotiated any meaningful rights to make decisions or to manage. you don't actually manage the asset. You don't actually attend the meetings. You don't do anything except, here's my 500,000 bucks from my investors. And then you walk away. That's actually not legal. And a lot of people call that the Code GP model. But actually, you're either an active partner in the deal or you're not.   Would it change Seth if I, it sounds like what you're saying is I'm bringing 500K and then I'm just leaving. I'm just like, here you go. Here's, I'm just hooking you up. Would that change if I put my own money into the deal? Now I'm an LP or no, there's more complicated.   Now you're, yeah, now you're an LP because it's your money. So you're just an investor.   Right. you're saying I could, yeah. So you're saying the difference between the example you just gave is the fact that that person never had money in, they just brought money in. That's none of their own money. And then they didn't do anything. You're saying that's a red flag for lack of better words, if they don't have the proper, I guess, voting rights, manager rights, et cetera. Is that an accurate recap?   Yeah, I can use my own capital. I can put my own half a million dollars into somebody's deal and be a passive investor. And that's okay. I'm not raising capital. That's my capital. But if I said, okay, here's $250,000 from my mom and $50,000 from Rubin and another $100,000 from this person and that person. And I put it in a LLC or I just bring them into the deal. Then that is raising capital. You're raising capital from other people. And that's, that's the difference there.   (Seth Bradley) (54:14.254) Yeah, so it's almost like you could be stacking, you know, people are a bunch of people are recruiting for the fund, but those folks are not on there as investors. It's aggregated funds, essentially, which could create a problem, right? Is that what you're saying? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Very interesting. I never even thought of that case study. Yeah.   Yeah, I didn't even ask your question though, which was how much money can you make? Right? So typically, typically, and again, we're putting securities laws aside here. We're just talking about kind of industry norms, we'll call it. Maybe 30 % or so is put aside for the capital raising. So 30 % of the GP. let's say there's a syndication where you do a 70 30 split, 70 % goes to the investors, 30 % goes to the general partners. Well,   If you bring in, let's say, 100 % of the equity, you bring in all of it, then you'll probably be allocated about 30 % of the general partnership. So 30 % of the 30 % in that example. So you get 9 % of the deal.   What did you mean by 100 % of the equity amount following?   So if you had to raise, let's say you're closing on a $10 million property and you need to raise $4 million to close it, or let's say the down payment plus capital improvements, something like that, and you bring in the full $4 million, you brought in 100 % of the equity needed to close the deal.   Ruben Kanya (55:38.574) Yep. And then overall, so and then what has happened now? So what's going on now or what's happened over the last couple of years is that there have been some very well-known syndicators in the space get investigated by the SEC and people have said, all right, well, now we need to figure out a different way to raise capital, compliantly. Right. And the answer is actually always been out there, but it's had some difficulties and that's a fund to fund. So   people out there, they've heard of a fund to fund. This is more a more prominent way, a more compliant way to raise capital nowadays. But I'll tell you what, comparing it to the CoGP model, it's more complicated. It costs more money and it's just a lot more work for you as the capital aggregator or the fundraiser. So people have avoided it because they've just done the CoGP model because it's easier. But now that the CoGP model isn't as available, people are still doing it, but people are kind of shying away from it because of the   the investigations that went on. Fund to Fund has become a lot more prominent and you have companies like Tribe Best who I'm chief legal officer for, full disclosure. We put together a Fund to Fund product where we make it cheaper, easier, more compliant, and you can just do it very easily and within five business days because we do everything for you. So instead of you having to find a securities attorney and a CPA, open a business banking account, file your LLC,   Walk your investors through the signing ceremony and get them to wire your funds. We call that herding the cats. Do all these things and put your cap table together, do your distributions, all those things that you'd normally have to do. Tribe Best does. And we do it for a very low price in comparison to what I would charge you if you came to me as a law client.   Interesting so I like how you just covered the foundation there. Let's go back to the 10 million dollar example, right? Yeah, you put in equity is you said so this is me saying Equity to close is 4 million. And so I'm bringing in 4 million just so I'm clear is do I have and this is my assumption that a Lot of syndicators are also raising the capital for that 4 million. Is that not correct?   Ruben Kanya (57:55.032) Typically, yes.   Okay, so then you're saying, just want to make sure I understand all the different use cases. So I could be 4 million and then the Delta, I can either traditional lending and or have my investors cover the Delta, which would be the 6 million. Is that accurate?   Yeah, I mean you can find however you need to fill in that the debt the equity stack Well wouldn't be the equity stack the full capital stack. Yeah   Typical though, it more typical that if I'm the GP to $10 million asset that I'm actually going to raise, I don't know, $3.5 million and put 500K on my own money? Is that more typical than I'm...   I would say that is typical. Yep. That is more typical. would say prime example idea, $10 million property, get a $6 million, maybe a little bit more, $6, $7 million loan. And then you raise three or $4 million, whether that's from passive investors or whether that's your own capital that you put in, or maybe you bring in fund to fund investors.   (Seth Bradley) (59:02.478) Okay, so that's where I wanted to ask the question, fund to fund. Tell me how that's different than the, bring in 3.5, I bring in 500K to the table, I raised 3.5, now I have a $4 million down payment, we borrow $6 million on debt. Tell me how the fund to fund is different than that approach.   Sure. So that deal that you just described, we like to call that when we're talking it with respect to fund to funds, the target deal. So that's the target deal. Like that's the entity and the structure that's buying the asset. So they're buying this $10 million asset. We're actually at the fund to fund level, one level down from there. So we create our own legal structure, our own LLC, and you have your own manager, a fund manager who brings in their own passive investors and they put them in that fund to fund legal entity.   And then the fund of fund legal entity actually invests into the target deal. So they come into the target deal as basically a big passive investor. let's say they aggregate a half a million dollars where typically, you know, the average investor might be $50,000. So these are bigger investors. It's just one big investor to the lead sponsor or the target deal, but it's really, yeah, it's really another fund is what it is. So it's a fund of a fund or a fund of a syndication.   That is so interesting. so you're saying that is becoming more prevalent. You fund a fund. I mean, I would imagine that's where not to get so far off topic, but that's where a lot of big companies who are deploying their excess capital or investing in. I I guess it's in multiple portfolios, right? Investing, right? mean, there's commercial, there's insurance. I mean, there's so many different things you can invest your money into.   Yes.   (Seth Bradley) (01:00:46.656) Is that all fun to fun families essentially?   For sure. For sure. Yeah. You know, you can call it a fund. There's different kinds of fund to funds. Fund funds aren't new. They've just been deployed in a different way recently or more prominently or more often, which is this kind of this I'll call it. We like to call it an SPV fund to fund single purpose vehicle fund to fund. Now other people will call it that same thing and mean something different, but the way that we mean it is that we create this fund to fund entity.   And it's a single purpose vehicle, meaning it's created only to invest in one deal. So that $10 million multifamily deal, we create a fund of an SPV fund of fund only to invest in that one

OPM v. Moulton

Registration is now open for senior executives who want to take a leadership development training program. The Office of Personnel Management is encouraging federal employees to sign up after launching the new training series this week. The OPM program comes alongside other big changes for the Senior Executive Service this year, and here with more details is Federal News Network's Drew Friedman.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Federal employees submitting their retirement paperwork may have to wait longer to get their claims processed. The Office of Personnel Management reported that during July, it took the agency 59 days, on average, to process a federal employee's retirement package from start to finish. That's two weeks longer, on average, than it took OPM to work through cases in June. Another 8,300 federal employees sent their retirement paperwork to OPM last month. All combined, that adds up to nearly 37,000 feds who have submitted a retirement claim since April. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Top headlines for Thursday, July 31, 2025In this episode, we explore the recent legal battle as a coalition of Christian groups challenges the Trump administration's controversial policy permitting ICE operations at places of worship. We then shift focus to the international stage, where world leaders and humanitarian organizations are unveiling new strategies to address the emergent humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Plus, we examine the debate in California, where a parental rights group raises alarms over a proposed bill seeking to protect undocumented immigrant children, warning that it may dangerously redefine guardianship. 00:11 Christian groups seek to stop ICE operations on church properties01:05 OPM issues guidance on religious expression at federal workplaces01:52 Arab League nations demand Hamas leave Gaza02:56 Ray Comfort praises police response, thanks God after break-in03:45 World leaders, aid groups react to humanitarian crisis in Gaza04:38 Parental rights group: Calif. bill could 'make kidnapping' easier05:37 Lauren Daigle surprised Camp Mystic survivorSubscribe to this PodcastApple PodcastsSpotifyGoogle PodcastsOvercastFollow Us on Social Media@ChristianPost on TwitterChristian Post on Facebook@ChristianPostIntl on InstagramSubscribe on YouTubeGet the Edifi AppDownload for iPhoneDownload for AndroidSubscribe to Our NewsletterSubscribe to the Freedom Post, delivered every Monday and ThursdayClick here to get the top headlines delivered to your inbox every morning!Links to the NewsChristian groups seek to stop ICE operations on church properties | PoliticsOPM issues guidance on religious expression at federal workplaces | PoliticsArab League nations demand Hamas leave Gaza | WorldRay Comfort praises police response, thanks God after break-in | U.S.World leaders, aid groups react to humanitarian crisis in Gaza | WorldParental rights group: Calif. bill could 'make kidnapping' easier | PoliticsLauren Daigle surprised Camp Mystic survivor | Entertainment

Can AI run the government?     In this episode of The Data Chronicles, Scott Loughlin talks with Taka Ariga, former Chief AI Officer at OPM and Chief Data Scientist at GAO, about how the US federal government is approaching its use of AI.  With a focus on the benefits and risks created by AI in the public sector, Scott and Taka explore the impact of AI on the public workforce, public services, national security, and policy making, while discussing agile governance, transparency, and the evolving leadership role of Chief AI Officers.     Two things become clear. First, the government is experiencing the same AI legal concerns as the private sector. And, second, companies and government have much to learn from one another on how they can each harness AI's promise and manage its risks.

Since taking office, the Trump administration has made it a top priority to dismantle what it perceives as federal bureaucratic bloat. But it's the belief of some that those cuts to the federal workforce and federal programs have gone too far, damaging the government's capacity to meet its mission and serve the American public. Rob Shriver, former acting OPM director during the Biden administration, is one of those. And in his new role as Managing Director of Democracy Forward's Civil Service Strong initiative, he's helping launch a new Civil Service Defense and Innovation Fellowship Program that aims to rebuild that lost capacity by calling on former government officials to “produce research and analysis documenting the scope and consequences of cuts to federal agencies, and develop and incubate innovative work to inform future policymaking and to rebuild government capacity.” Shriver joins the podcast to discuss the state of the federal workforce, the new fellowship and what he sees ahead. Let's go now to that interview. The Department of Defense's No. 2 IT official for the past two years is leaving the role, the department announced Monday. Leslie Beavers, who also served as acting DOD CIO for a period at the end of the Biden administration and during the early days of the second Trump administration, will step down as DOD principal deputy CIO at the end of September. In a social media post, the DOD Office of the CIO congratulated Beavers who announced Monday that she will be stepping down from her position at the end of September after more than 30 years of uniformed and civilian service. Beavers played a key role in the Office of the CIO's delivery of its Fulcrum IT strategy in 2024 with then-CIO John Sherman. When Sherman stepped down from the CIO role at the end of June 2024, Beavers filled it temporarily until Katie Arrington was appointed to perform the duties of CIO in March. Since then, Beavers retained her deputy role, supporting new efforts under Arrington's leadership like the Software Fast Track initiative and “blowing up” the Risk Management Framework. It's unclear what Beavers' next role will be after her departure or who will take her place when she officially leaves. President Donald Trump has tapped State Department leader Michael Rigas to serve as the General Services Administration's new acting chief, the agency announced Monday. It marks the third GSA appointment for Rigas, who has spent the past few months at the State Department as the deputy secretary for management and resources, according to a statement from Marianne Copenhaver, associate administrator for the GSA. Copenhaver wrote in a statement to FedScoop: “We're thrilled to have his institutional knowledge, leadership, and decades of experience in the private and public sector. Under Mike's leadership, GSA will continue to deliver effective and efficient government services in real estate, acquisition, and technology.” Stephen Ehikian, who has served since January as GSA's acting administrator, will continue his role as deputy administrator, Copenhaver added. Ehikian is a former Salesforce vice president and self-proclaimed “serial entrepreneur.” The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every Monday-Friday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast  on Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud, Spotify and YouTube.

NAPS Executive Vice President Chuck Mulidore joins Bob to discuss NAPS' successful efforts to defeat USPS employee cuts in the FY 2025 Budget Reconciliation Act. Chuck and Bob also talk about a July 2 Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Inspector General report, which warned of impending danger to the 2025 Postal Service Health Benefits Program open season. Chuck and Bob review NAPS' activities on Capitol Hill to ensure that OPM has the necessary resources to conduct the open season effectively. Finally, Chuck and Bob chat about potential EAS re-classifications due to plant changes, a July 24 Senate hearing  on two nominees to the USPS Board of Governors, and the 2025 "Cure for the Summertime Blues" SPAC Raffle.

June saw the third largest number of federal employees retire in calendar year 2025. More than 13,400 feds submitted their paperwork. At the same time, the average number of days to process retirement paperwork dropped to 45, the lowest number since February and the second lowest in the last 18 months. OPM's backlog of retirement claims stands just over 26 thousand, the highest level since October 2023. In all, 70,351 employees retired in the first six months of 2025 as compared to 56,756 employees who left federal service during the first six months of 2024. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this provocative and incredibly insightful episode of An Educated Guest, host Todd Zipper sits down with John Katzman, a serial entrepreneur and one of the most influential figures in education, known for founding The Princeton Review and Noodle. John offers a no-holds-barred perspective on the seismic shifts needed across the entire education landscape.The conversation delves into the evolution of online program management (OPM), why its traditional model is unsustainable, and how Noodle aims to redefine university partnerships. John tackles the soaring costs of higher education, proposing systemic solutions to the $1.7 trillion student debt crisis that challenge conventional thinking. He then pivots to K-12, dissecting its "governance problem" and explaining why top-down reforms continually fail. This episode is packed with John's unique, often controversial, takes on everything from the resurgence of for-profits to the transformative (and sometimes reckless) potential of AI in education, all while offering powerful insights for edtech founders and a glimpse into his vision for the future of learning.Key Takeaways from this Episode:OPM's Future: John's candid assessment of the Online Program Management (OPM) industry, why he believes it's "transitional," and how Noodle is forging a new path for university partnerships.Solving the Student Debt Crisis: A deep dive into the true cost of higher education and innovative, systemic solutions to the $1.7 trillion student debt burden, including state-level incentives.K-12's Governance Challenge: An incisive critique of the American K-12 system, arguing that curricular reforms fail due to a fundamental "governance problem" that requires radical change.AI's Dual Impact: Insights into how Artificial Intelligence can dramatically lower administrative costs and enable powerful, affordable learning simulations, but also its potential pitfalls if deployed carelessly.Why EdTech Philanthropy Falls Short: A frank discussion on why billions of dollars invested in education reform have yielded limited impact, citing arrogance, systemic inertia, and a lack of true R&D.The Power of Data & Networked Universities: Discover how data can personalize student support and why forging strong university networks is crucial for adaptability and innovation in a rapidly changing world.About Our Guest:John Katzman is a legendary entrepreneur and visionary in the education sector, having founded three incredibly impactful companies: The Princeton Review, 2U (formerly), and Noodle. As the Founder and former CEO of Noodle, he has been at the forefront of transforming higher education through online program management and strategic partnerships. Katzman is a frequent commentator on educational trends, policy, and innovation.

Discover three proven strategies beginners can use to break into real estate: creative financing, using private money (OPM), and starting small with high-leverage loans. Real-world examples and clear guidance—everything needed to get in the game.Learn how master lease agreements and seller carry second mortgages can help you bypass traditional lending barriers and take control of cash-flowing properties.See how one of our students closed a 12-unit deal with just $25K of her own money—and how you can do the same by structuring smart partnerships.Explore why beginning with a fourplex or smaller residential property can be the smartest move for long-term wealth building, and how FHA or VA loans can make it even more accessible.

Two-time Emmy and Three-time NAACP Image Award-winning television Executive Producer Rushion McDonald interviewed Troy Hudson. A deeply personal and insightful interview with former NBA player and author Troy “T-Hud” Hudson. Here's a breakdown of the key highlights and takeaways:

Two-time Emmy and Three-time NAACP Image Award-winning television Executive Producer Rushion McDonald interviewed Troy Hudson. A deeply personal and insightful interview with former NBA player and author Troy “T-Hud” Hudson. Here's a breakdown of the key highlights and takeaways:

Two-time Emmy and Three-time NAACP Image Award-winning television Executive Producer Rushion McDonald interviewed Troy Hudson. A deeply personal and insightful interview with former NBA player and author Troy “T-Hud” Hudson. Here's a breakdown of the key highlights and takeaways:

Learn how private money lending real estate transforms your funding strategy and why private money lending real estate is the go-to for savvy investors. In this episode, we unpack the fundamentals of private money lending real estate to help you raise capital without bank loans.✅ Understand real estate syndication explained—how pooling stranger capital under a sponsor/LP works✅ Discover creative financing in real estate techniques like seller-financing and private notes✅ Learn the ins and outs of real estate joint ventures to partner with active investors✅ Explore OPM strategies for investors that leverage other people's money for growth✅ See how to raise capital with OPM step by step, from pitch to closing✅ Avoid legal missteps with Howey test real estate investing—know when you're issuing a security✅ Draft compliant deals using an operating agreement real estate JV to define roles and equity✅ Compare capital-raise vehicles so you choose the right method for your projectBy the end, you'll have a clear roadmap for structuring deals that attract private lenders, stay SEC-compliant, and scale your real-estate portfolio. No jargon, just actionable insights straight from industry experts.

SummaryIn this conversation, Host Ryan Roghaar and his guest Jones Loflin discuss the importance of conscious choice in personal and professional life, emphasizing the need for self-care, work-life balance, and the courage to embrace failure. He shares insights on building confidence and competence, the significance of clarity in achieving goals, and the role of community support in entrepreneurship. The discussion highlights the cultural challenges that affect confidence and the necessity of celebrating wins to foster a positive mindset.TakeawaysThe power of choice is crucial for personal and professional growth.Work-life balance should be viewed as work-life integration.Self-care is essential for maintaining energy and focus.Taking action in the face of uncertainty is necessary for progress.Building competence requires recognizing areas for improvement and seeking help.Celebrating small wins boosts confidence and motivation.Clarity in goals leads to more effective actions.Failure is a stepping stone to success and learning.Community support is vital for entrepreneurs.Differentiating oneself in a crowded market is essential for success.Chapters00:00 Introduction to the Go-Giver Philosophy08:20 Understanding Value and Self-Worth11:31 Authenticity and Finding Purpose14:14 The Importance of Passion in Business17:42 The Role of Mentorship in Personal Growth20:35 Breaking Through Barriers to SuccessCredits:Hosted by Ryan RoghaarProduced by Ryan RoghaarTheme music: "Perfect Day" by OPM  The Eggs Podcast Spotify playlist:bit.ly/eggstunesThe Plugs:The Show: eggscast.com@eggshow on twitter and instagramOn iTunes: itun.es/i6dX3pCOnStitcher: bit.ly/eggs_on_stitcherAlso available on Google Play Music!Mike "DJ Ontic":Shows and info:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠djontic.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@djontic on twitterRyan Roghaar:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠rogha.ar

How do you fund your first real estate deal if you don't have money? In this episode, Spencer Sutton and Adam Hobson break down creative real estate financing strategies used by investors to buy deals without using their own cash. Whether you're flipping houses, buying rentals, or wholesaling, this episode shows how real estate investors finance deals and scale. You'll Learn: How to use OPM to fund your next deal What hard money is (and how to leverage it) The strategy behind refinancing How to build lasting and lucrative relationships with investors Favorite Quote: "There's really no excuse; if you want to do something, you can. The money's out there." Who Should Listen:

1.  Sigo recordando a Carlos Merced, lo grande que fue y su participación en este programa2.  Exmaestra se declara culpable de explotación sexual de un menor en #Mayagüez3.  La UPR obtiene luz verde para presupuesto de $1,210 millones4.  La vista de inmigración de la ciudadana dominicana, Aracelys Terrero Mota, será en PR.5.  Todavía no se sabe cuándo Wanda Vázquez se declarará culpable6.  Empresa encargada de Renovaciones Online exige reunión con Salud tras cancelación de contrato7.  ¿Bota el dinero la Procuraduría de las mujeres? Campaña de la OPM refuerza narrativas inefectivas sobre la violencia machista. Expertas coinciden en que la nueva estrategia publicitaria revictimiza a las sobrevivientes8.  "Tienen que bajarle dos", responde Soto Aguilú ante remoción placa en su oficina. La senadora insistió que ella lo hizo porque leía "Presidenta de la Comisión de lo Jurídico".9.  EEUU adelanta un posible acuerdo de alto al fuego en Gaza10.             EE.UU. detiene algunos envíos de ayuda militar a Ucrania11.             La Unión Europea anuncia nuevas directrices sobre el uso de la inteligencia artificial en sectores críticos12.             EEUU La Reserva Federal señala una posible pausa en las subidas de tipos de interés a la espera de nuevos datos de inflaciónEste es un programa independiente y sindicalizado. Esto significa que este programa se produce de manera independiente, pero se transmite de manera sindicalizada, o sea, por las emisoras y cadenas de radio que son más fuertes en sus respectivas regiones. También se transmite por sus plataformas digitales, aplicaciones para dispositivos móviles y redes sociales. Estas emisoras de radio son:1.    Cadena WIAC - WYAC 930 AM Cabo Rojo- Mayagüez2.    Cadena WIAC – WISA 1390 AM Isabela3.    Cadena WIAC – WIAC 740 AM Área norte y zona metropolitana4.    WLRP 1460 AM Radio Raíces La voz del Pepino en San Sebastián5.    X61 – 610 AM en Patillas6.    X61 – 94.3 FM Patillas y todo el sureste7.    WPAB 550 AM - Ponce8.    ECO 93.1 FM – En todo Puerto Rico9.    WOQI 1020 AM – Radio Casa Pueblo desde Adjuntas10. Mundo Latino PR.com, la emisora web de música tropical y comentario Una vez sale del aire, el programa queda grabado y está disponible en las plataformas de podcasts tales como Spotify, Soundcloud, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts y otras plataformas https://anchor.fm/sandrarodriguezcotto También nos pueden seguir en:REDES SOCIALES:  Facebook, X (Twitter), Instagram, Threads, LinkedIn, Tumblr, TikTok BLOG:  En Blanco y Negro con Sandra http://enblancoynegromedia.blogspot.com  SUSCRIPCIÓN:Substack, plataforma de suscripción de prensa independientehttps://substack.com/@sandrarodriguezcotto OTROS MEDIOS DIGITALES: ¡Ey! Boricua, Revista Seguros. Revista Crónicas y otrosEstas son algunas de las noticias que tenemos hoy En Blanco y Negro con Sandra. 

What if you could stop chasing deals and start collecting payments like a bank? In this eye-opening episode, I sit down with Patrick Franz, founder of Note Investor University, to explore the power and potential of note investing—an often-overlooked strategy that's changing the game for savvy real estate investors. Patrick pulls back the curtain on how owning mortgage notes can create more security, scalability, and true passive income than traditional rentals or flips.Whether you're tired of toilets, tenants, and turnover or just looking for smarter ways to grow your portfolio, this episode is packed with insight. We talk about the difference between owning real estate and owning the paper behind it, how to find and evaluate notes, and how you can leverage private capital to build a cash-flowing note portfolio—even if you're brand new to the space.Timeline Summary[1:18] - Patrick Franz explains what note investing is and why most real estate investors haven't explored it[2:56] - Key differences between real estate investing and buying promissory notes[5:03] - A side-by-side comparison of the landlord model versus the lender model[10:06] - How buying notes at a discount creates instant equity and above-market returns[13:51] - Understanding the secondary mortgage market and how to legally step into the bank's shoes[17:08] - Where to find notes and why sourcing them isn't the hardest part[20:03] - Why notes are safer and easier to pitch to private lenders than rental properties[22:21] - The magic of amortization and why it benefits note holders over time[24:28] - How third-party servicers manage the process and make it truly passive[27:12] - How to work with Patrick and what Note Investor University offers[29:35] - Real success stories and what's possible within just 12 months of learning and applying note investing strategiesKey Takeaways1.You don't have to own the property to profit from real estate – owning the debt can be even more powerful.2.Note investing offers instant equity and stable, predictable cash flow, often with double-digit returns.3.Notes are easier to pitch to private lenders because they are safer, backed by real estate, and not subject to market fluctuations.4.You can scale your portfolio using OPM (other people's money) once you master the process and build your expertise.5.Financial freedom is achievable within 36 months with the right note investing strategy and education.Links & Resources•Schedule a call with Patrick: calendly.com/thenotementor•Learn more about Simple CFO: https://simplecfo.com •Contact David Richter and Simple CFO: https://rei.simplecfo.com/scheduleacall•More about David Richter: https://join.simplecfo.com/david•Want David on your podcast? Contact us at: john@simplecfo.com •Browse notes: paperstac.com•Financial clarity and coaching: simplecfo.comIf this episode opened your eyes to a smarter, more secure way to invest in real estate, follow, rate, and review the Profit First for ROI podcast. And don't forget to share it with a friend who needs to hear this. Let's help more investors make profit a habit in their business.

Agencies officially have more leeway to fire federal employees who recently started a new job. That's after the Office of Personnel Management finalized changes to the federal probationary period. OPM says its final rule sets expectations for a high performing Federal workforce, but some say the OPM rule focuses on the wrong reforms for probationary employees. Federal News Network's Drew Friedman, got more from the Partnership for Public Services, Vice President of Government Affairs, Jenny Mattingly.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Two-time Emmy and Three-time NAACP Image Award-winning television Executive Producer Rushion McDonald interviewed Troy Hudson. A deeply personal and insightful interview with former NBA player and author Troy “T-Hud” Hudson. Here's a breakdown of the key highlights and takeaways:

Welcome back to Performance Marketing Spotlight! In this episode, host Marshall Nyman sits down with Brook Schaaf, founder and CEO of FMTC, to unpack his remarkable journey through the world of affiliate and performance marketing. From his early days at Zappos and the founding of one of the industry's earliest OPM agencies, to the growth of FMTC as a leader in coupon and deal feeds, Brook shares candid insights on building businesses, navigating industry challenges, and the evolving landscape shaped by AI and data management. You'll hear Brook's perspective on why affiliate remains a strong channel, how brands and professionals can thrive in the space, and what the future holds for performance marketing. Plus, catch the latest on FMTC's exciting product updates and industry events. Whether you're an industry veteran or new to affiliate marketing, this conversation is packed with valuable advice and thought-provoking commentary.

Ready to take a deep dive and learn how to generate personal tax-free cash flow from your corporation? Enroll in our FREE masterclass here and book a call hereAre you risking your financial future by blindly following the use “Other People's Money (OPM)” playbook in real estate investing?If you've ever been tempted by social media gurus promising Canadian real estate investment riches without using your own cash, this episode is your wake-up call. Before you borrow a dime, you need to understand what Canadian mortgage lenders and private lenders really look for, when “Other People's Money (OPM)” crosses legal lines, and how over-leveraging could quietly destroy your financial wealth health—and relationships.In this episode, you'll learn:The legal and financial traps behind gift letters, Canadian mortgages, private lending, and misused HELOCs.Smarter, safer ways to structure real estate joint ventures and family real estate lending deals—without causing drama (or fraud).How to assess your true readiness for using leverage to invest, and why a conservative strategy can actually accelerate your Canadian wealth.Press play now to uncover the real risks and rewards of using Other People's Money (OPM) — and avoid the mistakes that cost Canadian real estate investors more than just money.Discover which phase of wealth creation you are in. Take our quick assessment and you'll receive a custom wealth-building pathway that matches your phase and learn our CRA compliant tax optimized strategies. Take that assessment here.Canadian Wealth Secrets Show Notes Page:Consider reaching out to Kyle…taking a salary with a goal of stuffing RRSPs;…investing inside your corporation without a passive income tax minimization strategy;…letting a large sum of liquid assets sit in low interest earning savings accounts;…investing corporate dollars into GICs, dividend stocks/funds, or other investments attracting corporate passive income taxes at greater than 50%; or,…wondering whether your current corporate wealth management strategy is optimal for your specific situation.Canadian real estate investing with Other People's Money (OPM) isn't a cheat code—it's a high-risk strategy that demands careful planning and legal awareness. For Canadian investors and entrepreneurs, understanding how to legally structure joint ventures, private lending, and HELOC strategies is essential to avoid financial disaster. This episode explores OPM pitfalls like fake gift letters, overleveraging, and misused Canadian mortgage lending rules. Discover how smart Canadian investors assess risk, Ready to connect? Text us your comment including your phone number for a response!Canadian Wealth Secrets is an informative podcast that digs into the intricacies of building a robust portfolio, maximizing dividend returns, the nuances of real estate investment, and the complexities of business finance, while offering expert advice on wealth management, navigating capital gains tax, and understanding the role of financial institutions in personal finance.

Daily Scoop listeners and readers of FedScoop will recall the shocking news earlier this year when 18F, a decade-old digital services consultancy in the General Services Administration, was shuttered by the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency. Members of the team have banded together since their termination to keep an active presence online through 18F.org in the wake of their dismantling. But the group isn't going out without a fight. Several senior members of 18F in late May filed a class action appeal to the Merit System Protection Board claiming that GSA lacked a “valid reason” for firing them and targeted them as an act of “retaliation” for their political beliefs. In the appeal, they call for a hearing and to have their removal reversed. Lindsay Young is the former executive director of 18F and one of the name appellants representing the class in the appeal. She joins the podcast for a conversation about how the “deletion” of 18F went down, what she and her team have been doing since, and what they hope to accomplish with the appeal. U.S. officials violated federal privacy law and flouted cybersecurity protocol in sharing Office of Personnel Management records with DOGE affiliates, a federal district court judge in New York ruled Monday, granting a request for a preliminary injunction against the administration. In a 99-page order, Judge Denise Cote of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York concluded that federal worker and union plaintiffs had shown that the government defendants in the challenge shared OPM records with “individuals who had no legal right of access to those records” in violation of the Privacy Act of 1974 and cybersecurity standards. “This was a breach of law and of trust,” Cote said in the order. “Tens of millions of Americans depend on the Government to safeguard records that reveal their most private and sensitive affairs.” The ruling is the latest in a challenge to DOGE's data access at OPM brought by a coalition of federal unions and current and former government employees or contractors. A new executive order from President Donald Trump aims to boost drone manufacturing in the United States, an effort the administration hopes will spur productivity and technological development and secure the country's industrial base. Meanwhile, a second executive order aims to combat the risk that, as drone usage proliferates, the technology could also be used to threaten public safety and endanger critical infrastructure. The “Unleashing American Drone Dominance” and “Restoring American Airspace Sovereignty” executive orders, both signed last Friday, come amid growing concerns about the operation of the National Airspace System, the airspace the Federal Aviation Administration monitors for commercial flights, space launches, and other aerial activity. Drones, sometimes called unmanned aerial systems, are also used to smuggle drugs and assist in criminal activity. Unauthorized UASs have increasingly shown up near some nuclear facilities, military bases, and commercial airports, raising concerns, too. The new executive order on airspace sovereignty aims to combat the problem, broadly charging federal agencies to detect drone activity, which will require the use of tracking and identification technology. The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every Monday-Friday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast  on Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud, Spotify and YouTube.

In this week's episode of Abundance Thursdays, Vinney “Smile” Chopra and Gualter Amarelo unpack a truth that most people overlook: your job is not the goal—it's the tool. If you're grinding 40+ hours a week but not building real wealth, you're missing the point. Your W2 income should buy back your time—not just pay bills.   In this candid, energetic conversation, Vinney and Gualter share:

Welcome to the Real Deals Show!In this episode, we're diving into a $105K profit deal breakdown that shows exactly how Daryl used creative financing and OPM (Other People's Money) to achieve massive results.Daryl shares his journey of going from full-time contractor to successful cross-border real estate investor. He opens up about how taking massive action, leveraging creative financing, and using OPM helped him escape the rat race and build a profitable real estate portfolio.You'll get a full deal breakdown of one of his most impressive projects—earning $105,000 in profit—and learn the exact strategies he used to make it happen.From investing in multiple Canadian provinces to now expanding into the U.S. real estate market, Daryl explains the advantages of U.S. investing as a Canadian and what's possible when you follow the right system.If you're serious about learning how to build wealth with real estate investing, especially using creative strategies and OPM, this episode is a must-watch.______________________________________________✅ Thanks for stopping by! We're thrilled to have you here.

Les The DJ serves up our first ever OPM special with deep grooves from the Philippines featuring Hajji Alejandro, Lerma Dela Cruz, Blackbuster, Apo Hiking Society and more. Plus lush sounds of the Filipino diaspora from Mndsgn to Freddie Joachim, an irrefutable jazz gem by Nao Yoshioka and more Pacific funk power from the Happy Dolls and Aria Yunior. View the full playlist for this show at https://www.wefunkradio.com/show/1251 Enjoying WEFUNK? Listen to all of our mixes at https://www.wefunkradio.com/shows/

Today on Money 911, I am so honored to welcome a guest who has literally reshaped the landscape of wealth building — Brad Blazar! Brad is the former CEO of a successful oil company and is now considered one of the world's foremost authorities on raising private capital. With over $2 billion raised, he mentors entrepreneurs and business owners globally, showing them how to attract high-net-worth investors, raise the money they need, and build unstoppable businesses. He's not just here to talk about numbers — Brad is here to awaken a new mindset in you, showing that you don't have to do it all alone and that the power of OPM — other people's money — can be the key to your next level of success. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sam Primm grew up in St. Louis, MO, in a hardworking family with an engineer father and a teacher mother. Following the traditional path, he earned his degree and secured a stable corporate job in his hometown. While the role provided financial stability, its high-pressure demands and long hours highlighted its limitations and drained his energy. Determined to break free from the constraints of the corporate world, Sam turned to real estate as a way to build a different kind of future. The early years were filled with challenges, including failed ventures and hard-learned lessons. However, through persistence and a focus on continuous improvement, Sam developed strategies that worked. Over the next nine years, he built a real estate empire, acquiring $45 million in assets, flipping over 1,000 properties, and managing 150+ single-family rentals—all without using his own money. Sam's success in real estate inspired him to help others achieve similar results. He founded FasterFreedom, a platform designed to teach aspiring investors how to quit their jobs and create wealth through real estate. By sharing practical, up-to-date strategies based on his own experience, Sam equips his students with the tools and knowledge they need to succeed in today's market. Through his work, Sam has become a trusted mentor and resource for anyone looking to break free from traditional career paths and achieve financial independence. During the show we discussed: The mission of FasterFreedom and their target audience. Initial steps to take when getting started in real estate investing. How much capital is needed to begin investing in real estate. How to identify the best markets or neighborhoods for investment. Common strategies for financing real estate deals without personal funds. Ethical and effective ways to leverage other people's money (OPM). Key differences between wholesaling, flipping, and buy-and-hold strategies. Strategies for scaling from a single property to a large real estate portfolio. Deciding when to reinvest profits versus diversifying into other investments. Important metrics to evaluate the potential success of a property. Common mistakes made by new real estate investors and how to avoid them. Approaches to handling setbacks like failed deals or unexpected expenses. Major risks in real estate investing and ways to mitigate them. Resources:  https://www.fasterfreedom.com/  

Unlock the Wealth-Building Secrets of Real Estate Investing! Learn how strategic real estate investing can dramatically transform your financial future. Discover the Revolutionary "5 Ways You Get Paid" Strategy, updated for today's times: Appreciation: Turn a 5% property value increase into a potential 20% return Cash Flow: Generate steady monthly income from tenants Return on Amortization (ROA): Let tenants build your equity for you Tax Benefits: Enjoy generous government incentives for providing housing Inflation-Profiting: Transform economic challenges into your personal wealth generator  Key Highlights: Potential 38% first-year return on investment No special certification or license required Ethical wealth-building using other people's money Proven strategy for creating generational wealth Simple, accessible investment approach for ordinary people Your wealth-building journey starts today! Share the wealth by sharing this episode with a friend. Free Resources: Connect with a free GRE investment coach at GREinvestmentcoach.com Download the infographic gift summarizing the five ways real estate pays here. Show Notes: GetRichEducation.com/550 For access to properties or free help with a GRE Investment Coach, start here: GREmarketplace.com GRE Free Investment Coaching:GREmarketplace.com/Coach Get mortgage loans for investment property: RidgeLendingGroup.com or call 855-74-RIDGE  or e-mail: info@RidgeLendingGroup.com Invest with Freedom Family Investments.  You get paid first: Text FAMILY to 66866 Will you please leave a review for the show? I'd be grateful. Search “how to leave an Apple Podcasts review”  For advertising inquiries, visit: GetRichEducation.com/ad Best Financial Education: GetRichEducation.com Get our wealth-building newsletter free— text ‘GRE' to 66866 Our YouTube Channel: www.youtube.com/c/GetRichEducation Follow us on Instagram: @getricheducation Complete episode transcript:   Automatically Transcribed With Otter.ai    Keith Weinhold  0:01   Welcome to GRE. I'm your host. Keith Weinhold, real estate pays five ways updated for today's times, even with conservative assumptions, watch your total return from real estate climb to great heights today. You'll understand what billionaire real estate investors don't understand a new free audio course today on get rich education.    Since 2014 the powerful get rich education podcast has created more passive income for people than nearly any other show in the world. This show teaches you how to earn strong returns from passive real estate investing in the best markets without losing your time being a flipper or landlord. Show Host Keith Weinhold writes for both Forbes and Rich Dad advisors and delivers a new show every week since 2014 there's been millions of listener downloads of 188 world nations. He has a list show, guess who keep top selling personal finance author Robert Kiyosaki, get rich education can be heard on every podcast platform, plus it has its own dedicated Apple and Android listener phone apps build wealth on the go with the get rich education podcast. Sign up now for the get rich education podcast or visit get rich education.com   Speaker 1  1:12   You're listening to the show that has created more financial freedom than nearly any show in the world. This is get rich education.   Keith Weinhold  1:28   Welcome to GRE from Belgrade, Serbia to Bellingham, Washington and across 180 nations worldwide. I'm Keith weinholder. You are back inside get rich education. Today you're going to understand real estate investing really well, probably better than anyone that you know, in less than an hour. Now, before I begin investing in real estate, I seriously wondered how in the world it could possibly be a lucrative investment vehicle. I mean, like, how would that even work? Because you've got this physical structure where elements wear down the outside, tenants wear down the inside, and the whole thing only appreciates it about 5% a year. Yawn. That is really boring. Well, later I would start to put the pieces together. And actually didn't really understand leverage in cash flow until after I had bought my first rental property, I became the person, however, to coin the real estate pays five ways concept, and I discussed that years ago on the show here, and now I have updated it for today's times. So the principles remain the same, but the numbers are different. That's because today, cash flows are lower and interest rates are higher than they were five and 10 years ago. So let's see what total rate of return we come up with today, and just how we get there. And on the way, you'll see even more evidence of why compound interest does not build wealth, and getting your money to work for you doesn't build wealth either. And to say that is total heresy. In a lot of financial circles, you'll clearly see how real estate has really made more ordinary people wealthy than anything else. This is course level instruction, and you're getting it all free right here today as part of one of our weekly episodes. This will help you retire earlier than you ever imagined, or just find the time for yourself to become the best version of yourself. Now, for long time, listeners, I've got to tell you first, much of today is going to sound like a review, but I've got a really surprising twist at the end here, in the fifth of five ways that you're paid, I also have a free gift to give to you and to all listeners today. And this is not in any way, replay of old material. It's not AI generated. It never is. It is me talking to you updated for today's times. And this is we're about to get started. This is just with simple buy in hold real estate. So you don't even have to be a house flipper or a wholesaler or a landlord, and you can just use normal 30 year mortgage loans. And as we see, it doesn't even take a ton of money. These are fundamental wealth building attributes that lay people don't understand and will change your life. I mean, more than 95% of real estate investors don't even understand what I'm about to share. We're going to calculate your rate of return from each of the five ways we'll calculate, then your cumulative return on investment until it builds up and culminates. In your total return at the end today, and I'll tell you anything less than a 20 to 25% total return in this buy and hold real estate is actually disappointing, and you don't even need to take on inordinate risk. But you'll see the exact percentage that we get up to today, and how it gets even higher than 20 to 25% I mean, this is how real estate creates Young Money and old money and Fast Money and slow money, and gives you access to other people's money. Ethically, all of that, we have some new listeners dropping by today. So if you're new here, I'm Keith Weinhold, get rich education founder, Forbes real estate council member, best selling author, and long time real estate investor, also an incomprehensibly slack jawed and snaggletooth to podcaster. But see here in the audio only, you only have to hear the slack jaw, but video platforms where you'll find me and this course on YouTube and rumble, oh, through a disaster, because you both hear my slack jaw and have to see my snaggletooth. It's dreadful.    Getting back to the course here, you know, school did little to teach you and I about the most important things in life, like nutrition or relationships or money. And you know what drives most divorces? Can you guess what it is? I mean, it's not arguments over trigonometri or English grammar or the periodic table of the elements. No, it's money problems. Well, the financial education in this course, it's gonna help you solve that as much as anything you need to take on the mindset of how you must unlearn what you've learned before you can believe something else.    We're gonna use this same simple example of a $200,000 income property throughout the course a rental, single family home. Yes, you can still find many of these, and it's with a rent paying tenant. Now, if you want to think bigger than a 200k property, no problem. Say you want a $20 million apartment building, you can just multiply everything by 100 because we're talking about ratios today. Say that when you buy this property, your down payment and closing costs have you putting in 25% All right? So you've now got 50k invested on this 200k property.    Well, in the first of five ways you're paid appreciation is what it's called. Well, historically, real estate appreciates at about 5% per year. All right, see your 200k Income Property appreciates to 210k There's your 5% yawn, boring. That might only be about the real rate of inflation. That's what most people think. But look at what you just did there already. You just did something amazing. You already benefited from a force greater than compound interest. You just created compound leverage, and most people don't even know it, because your return is far greater than the 5% total appreciation your return on investment is your gain, which is 10k divided by the amount that you have invested, which is 50k because that's all that you put into this. You just got a 20% return from only the first of five ways you're paid appreciation. And now, if you're scratching your head wondering how that just happened, how did 5% return go to 20% no worries, I will slow it down. And this course never gets more complicated than this, you achieved a 5% return on both your 50k invested and the 150k that you borrowed from the bank. See the return on the bank's money doesn't go to the bank, it goes to you all while the tenant pays the interest on the mortgage loan. We'll get to that part later for you, this could be your first moment of epiphany in this course, a light bulb moment. Yes, today you'll get more light bulb moments than Thomas Edison. That is the magic of leverage. It's so simple ethically use other people's money, but most people are only getting compound interest, a return on their money, only not theirs and others like they could have great so where does appreciation come from? What is its source? Supply versus demand for real estate an area's wage growth, population growth, a region's infrastructure improvements contribute to this. The shrinking availability of developable. Land and more. Now what if real estate prices go down? You're covered. That will be addressed shortly. Here we are just scratching the surface. You're starting to figure out why wealthy people's money either starts out in real estate or ends up in real estate. And the thing is, is you can do this the same simple way that I did when I began as a real estate investor. You don't need any degree or certification or real estate license in order to do this. Real Estate pays five ways.    Now that you know about the first appreciation, leveraged appreciation in real estate's case will carry forward your 20% gain and add it onto the second of five ways you're paid, cash flow. For many, this is the most important one. One way for you to think about this second way cash flow is that it's the recurring income from your tenant that shows up, whether you had any involvement with the property that month or not. That's why this is passive income most months. This one is the most liquid of the five ways, because it pays you cash every month, and therefore you can immediately either reinvest it or just spend it and increase your standard of living. This is effectively your salary increase plan. Yes, it's the opposite of a 401 k, which is a salary reduction plan, which actually was an early name of 401 K plans, since this income is sourced by your tenant rent payment, minus the property expenses. Your Cash Flow is sourced by jobs, because that's how your tenant gets their rent payment that they pay you, and this is why I like larger metro areas, your market selection is more important than your property. That's a huge lesson right there, because it's about the durability of this cash flow. All right, we're about to run the numbers and see what your rate of return from passive cash flow is. Let's do it. We'll build on our example of your ownership of a 200k income property with your 50k down payment. All right, on the 200k rental single family home, say that your rent is $1,500 a month. That is therefore $18,000 of annual rent income. But then you need to deduct out your expenses, and you do have a lot of them. They are your mortgage and your operating expenses, like I've shared with you before. The easy way to remember those operating expenses is with the acronym VIMTUM, vacancy, insurance, maintenance, taxes, utilities and management, and paying that manager is what keeps this mostly passive for you. So to be clear, your rent income minus your mortgage in VIMTUM operating expenses equals your cash flow. You can kind of think of that as your rent overflow. Okay, here we go. Say you figure that from your 18k of annual rent income that you need to pay out 15k worth of annual expenses, that leaves you with $3,000 of cash flow, or so you thought, but you have a freak plumbing problem that creates a bill of 1000 bucks. However, you have property insurance, but say your insurance deductible is $1,000 so you've just got to come and pay out of pocket for your managers, plumber to fix it, and now the $3,000 of annual cash flow you thought you'd have only leaves you with $2,000 somewhat of a thin cash flow. Then that's a higher maintenance expense than you had previously forecast in your pretty looking pro forma projection. That often goes wrong, because something stupid often happens out of the blue in real estate investing, all right, well, with your $2,000 of cash flow, which is passive income, that's divided by your same 50k invested that gives you a return of 4% from the second of five ways you're paid. That number is what's known is the cash on cash return. You thought it would be 6% but we're being conservative. The Freak plumbing problem made it just 4% add this to the 20% from leverage depreciation in the first video, and you now have an accumulated 24% total rate of return from this income property already, and we still got three ways to go. We're just gonna keep piling onto this return in the next three ways you're paid. How high is this going to go? And you know what's interesting with this? Luke. Conservative math adding up your lofty return. It's actually conservative as we proceed, you'll note that I'm using simplification and rounding you're going to see me round down more than round up. To keep this conservative and real estate math is simple. It's just add, subtract, multiply or divide. There's nothing complex, no trigonometri or calculus or exponents. This is easy. You just have to know what numbers to use, and that's what you're learning and reinforcing today.    Now here's a weird scenario. Imagine if you had a stranger out there funding a bank account for you, making monthly contributions into this illiquid savings account. I mean, does that sound too good to be true? Nope. It exists. The third of five ways that real estate pays is exactly why this is real, as this free audio course, real estate pays five ways continues for you. Real estate has so many ROIs returns on investment that one of the five is called an Roa. That's the third way you're paid. And none of this material is new or esoteric or avant garde. It's always been out there. There's just been no one else that's put it together before this, most people were never taught how to build real estate wealth in the real world. And what's insane about this third of five ways you're paid is that now you're probably already getting paid more ways than you ever have. I mean, instead, what is most people's investing experience, it's in stocks, bonds, mutual funds, ETFs, gold or Bitcoin. I mean, that's where you're typically only paid one way, capital appreciation, if you even get that, and maybe a second way is if you have a dividend paying stock. But I mean, that's all you've got. One way, maybe two. If you want to build wealth, you've got to give your money multiple jobs. That's exactly what we're doing here. ROA stands for your return on amortization this third way you're paid is the monthly principal pay down portion of your mortgage. That's your return. So we're going to add your ROA to the 24% total return that we've accumulated so far. And now you might think you already have experience with an ROA if you have a mortgage on your own home, your primary residence, but no, not actually, because in your own home each month, a portion of your mortgage payment goes toward principal pay down and the rest of pay interest, but all you did in your primary residence is you went and you had to work to earn money all month. All you did at the end of that month was move that money from your cash pocket over to your equity pocket when that mortgage payment gets made. So that's merely a transfer of funds, but with income property, your tenant earned that cash that month to pay your mortgage principal payment, and we'll tally that up in a moment. On top of the principal, they pay your entire interest payment, plus your tenant pays you a little on top of that each month called cash flow, which was the second way you're paid. So yes, your tenant is going to work for you. If your tenants rent payment is a third of their income, they're working close to 10 days a month just for you, just to pay your rent. I mean, that is amazing. If you add properties with rent paying tenants like this. It's sort of like you have all these employees out there working for you, and yet you don't have to manage them at work. It is amazing this third of five ways focuses on that return on amortization, and the etymology of the word amortize that comes from the old French meaning death. And that makes sense, your tenant is slowly killing off your mortgage balance for you over time. So let's do this. Let's add up your ROA, all right, we're using this same example where you got a 150k loan on your 200k rental, single family home. Let's say that you got a 7% interest rate on a 30 year fixed rate mortgage, so just the plain everyday loan. Just look up any amortization calculator, enter those numbers in there, and you'll see that in year one, your tenant pays down over $1,500 of your income properties mortgage balance for you, let's round it down to just 1500 bucks, because it could have been some vacancy in there as well. Your ROA is simply this year, one principal pay down divided by your amount invested again, that is 1500 bucks divided by your 50k Of down payment and closing costs that you have in the property your skin in the game. And this is another 3% return for you. That's your Roa. I mean, you are beginning to really build wealth now. This is somewhat of a hidden wealth generator that a lot of investors never consider. Many of them are aware of this, though, it's like your tenant is funding an ill, liquid savings account that has your name on it. We'll add this 3% ROA to the tally of a 24% cumulative return that we figured from the first two ways. Yes, you are now up to a 27% total rate of return from appreciation, cash flow, your ROA, and we still have two of the five ways to discuss. We're just gonna keep piling onto your return. What is the source of your Roa? This 3% it is jobs again, your tenants income. If interest rates fall and you refinance, you'll get an even higher annual chunk of tenant made principal pay down, even with the initial loan kept in place this 7% mortgage note, how in future years, your amount of 10 it made principal pay down. Only keeps increasing over time. But we're only talking about year one in this whole example. We're going to carry forward your 27% total rate of return so far into the next one as this real estate pays five ways. Audio course will continue here in Episode 550 of the get rich education podcast, yeah, even the episode number has some fives in it as we roll on, breaking down just how the five ways build wealth more after the break, I'm your host, Keith Weinhold, this is get rich education.   You know what's crazy? Your bank is getting rich off of you. The average savings account pays less than 1% it's like laughable. Meanwhile, if your money isn't making at least 4% you're losing to inflation. That's why I started putting my own money into the FFI liquidity fund. It's super simple. Your cash can pull in up to 8% returns, and it compounds. It's not some high risk gamble like digital or AI stock trading. It's pretty low risk because they've got a 10 plus year track record of paying investors on time, in full every time. I mean, I wouldn't be talking about it if I wasn't invested myself. You can invest as little as 25k and you keep earning until you decide you want your money back. No weird lockups or anything like that. So if you're like me and tired of your liquid funds just sitting there doing nothing, check it out. Text family to 66866, to learn about freedom family investments, liquidity fund again. Text family to 66866. Hey, you can get your mortgage loans at the same place where I get mine, at Ridge lending group and MLS, 42056, they provided our listeners with more loans than any provider in the entire nation because they specialize in income properties. They help you build a long term plan for growing your real estate empire with leverage. You can start your pre qualification and chat with President Chaley Ridge personally. Start Now while it's on your mind at Ridge lendinggroup.com That's ridgelendinggroup.com.   Speaker 2  23:45   This is Ridge lending group's president, Caeli Ridge listen to get rich education with Keith Weinhold, and remember, don't quit your Daydream.   Keith Weinhold  24:10   Welcome back to get rich Education. I'm your host. Keith Weinhold, as we continue with the real estate pays five ways audio course, before the break, we're rolling forward a 27% total ROI from the first three ways that you're simultaneously paid. Again, nothing complicated, just with a piece of buy and hold real estate that you purchase carefully. You don't have to do any renovations. You don't have to be a landlord. This is how you're going to build forever wealth, legacy wealth, if you don't come from money now, money can come from you. This can shake up your entire family tree. After today, you'll have a concrete plan. I don't come from wealth. I build it myself, and I'm laying out the architecture of how I did. Just that in a simple way for you, the fourth of five ways you're paid is that real estate investors are rewarded with a generous basket of tax benefits from the government because you are doing what the government wants. You're providing others with housing. Informed people know that if you spend money on certain things like solar panels for your home or education expenses, you get a tax break for spending that money. Well, with real estate, you don't even need to spend any money to get a tax break every single year. Incredibly, you get the tax deduction anyway. It's easy. Let's do it here. And you know, it's time to make something crystallized for you. And this can rock your world and even induce some disbelief. Some people say, don't get your money. Get your money to work for you. We've all heard that. Here is the heterodox. Here is the paradigm shift. If you want to build wealth, don't get your money to work for you. Outside of this show, I bet you have never heard that iconoclastic stance your best and highest use as an investor is not to get your money to work for you. It's making other people's money work for you. OPM, now, you probably heard that before as well, but I've got a twist on that. But see if you want to build wealth, do you think you'd have to both think and act differently than the masses? I mean, yes, you certainly do, but this is your differentiator, even multi decade billionaire real estate investors don't realize what I'm about to share with you forever. Wealth is built. Early Retirement, wealth is built. Your standard of living is indelibly elevated beyond what you ever thought possible because you are ethically using other people's money three ways at the same time, the bank's money for leverage in the loan, which we covered in the first way, you're paid the tenants money for cash flow and loan pay down, which we covered in videos two and three. And now here you are using the government's money for generous tax benefits at scale, which we're covering in this fourth of five ways you're using other people's money, three ways at the same time within this, this is why you're building wealth. And of course, this does not mean you're exploiting people by using their money, just the opposite. You're doing good in the world. Provide people with housing that's clean, safe, affordable and functional. Do that, and you'll be profitable in the long term and never get called a slum lord. Rental property income is generally taxed at ordinary income tax rates, but you don't have to pay tax on all of your rental income. The tax deductions are generous from rental property, you can deduct out your mortgage interest and your operating expenses, which I will not cover in our example. You also get a depreciation deduction. We'll look at that one closely, and when you sell, you can endlessly defer your capital gains tax so you never have to pay it all of your life, all right. Well, what does this really mean? If you buy a rental property for 200k and after a bunch of years you sell it for 500k your capital gain was 300k in most investments, you need to pay capital gains tax of at least 15% on this you would take a $45,000 tax hit. But with real estate, when you sell if you generally replace it with a property of equal or greater value, your capital gains tax is zero, absolutely zero. Now, rental property taxes are somewhat complicated, and I am not a CPA, I'm giving general guidance. I'm not going to get into things like your adjusted basis and other details. In fact, I'm not even going to consider this benefit of deferred capital gains tax in tallying up your rate of return. So instead, let's only look at your return from the tax depreciation portion of your full basket of tax benefits. It's going to keep things simple, and it'll also keep our example more conservative. Yes, even though your 200k rental property in our example tends to appreciate in value, the government says you can get a tax break because they say that the property wears out over 27 and a half years. That's just what the IRS guideline is. This only applies to rental property. There's no depreciation deduction on a primary residence. Let's do it on your 200k property, you can only depreciate the structures value called the improvement, not the land portion. We'll say that your structure or house's value is 150k and the land is 50k even the IRS knows that land doesn't wear out, only the structure. Divide your 150k structure value by 27.5 Yep. Pretty weird, arbitrary number, but that's how long the IRS says it takes to wear out. That gives you $5,454 that's how much you can depreciate or shelter from taxes if you're in the 24% tax bracket, that's $1,309 in tax savings for you. Divide that by how much you have invested in this 200k property. Again, that was 50k when you made the down payment and closing costs. This is a 2.6% return. Let's keep being conservative and round that down to 2% there it is our number from the fourth of five ways you're paid. We are layering on another 2% return. Now, can you really call a tax break part of your return? Is that fair? Should that be considered? Yes, it is, in this case of tax depreciation, because you did not even have to incur an expense in order to get that deduction, that's why some people call it the magic of depreciation. Usually, to get a tax break, like I was saying earlier, you have to make an out of pocket expense, like pay for fees to attend a conference or buy solar panels or pay automobile expenses. But you don't have to do that here, so the 2% rate of return for your tax benefit is even more conservative when you realize that we also are not digging into how this piece of real estate can also make you eligible for other tax benefits like a qualified business income deduction, a cost segregation and bonus depreciation. And for simplicity, we're not going to go run examples on different marginal tax brackets, and there are income thresholds and other thresholds, whether you're married or single. And of course, we are excluding that erstwhile capital gains tax that you can legally duck out of to collect all the tax benefits without me having to get deeply involved. At the end of each year, my property manager just sends my property's financials directly to my bookkeeper. And yes, I know we've got some CPAs listening to this right now thinking that 2% that is much too low of a return from your basket of tax benefits, but that is all we're going to use. We're going to add this to the ROIs that we accumulated from leverage appreciation at 20% in the first way, cash flow at 4% in the second way, and an ROA of 3% in the third way, plus this 2% from tax benefits here in the fourth way, here we are up to a 29% first year total ROI from your 200k single family income property that you so wisely purchased. Now you know how to use other people's money three ways at the same time again, the banks, the tenants, and with these tax breaks the governments.    Let's move on to the fifth of five ways. Add up your total rate of return, and then I'll give you some more important takeaways to give this context, and I'm going to give you your free gift. Your fifth way is your second biggest profit center, and most real estate investors don't even know that it exists, you're going to profit from something that actually makes most people poorer. So we're going to take our 29% add the fifth way to it, and it's going to culminate in your total number. The fifth way is called inflation profiting. Remember, it's not inflation hedging. Real Estate bought the right way is not an inflation hedge. Hedging is defensive, meaning that you break even from inflation, but no instead, you're actually profiting from inflation. That's different. This is offensive. Now a conventional financial advisor. You know, they're often out there selling investment products that tout something like a 10% rate of return. You know, synonymous with a return from the s, p5, 100. Ask your financial advisor about the five drags on that return. It's 10% minus inflation, emotion, taxes, fees and volatility, and your adjusted return is often less than zero. Just look at their track record. Stocks and mutual funds don't make anyone wealthy. They might just preserve wealth if you already have it strategically bought. Real estate has hegemony over all the other. Set classes precisely because it pays five ways. Either you can be a conformer or you can build wealth. If you want to escape financial mediocrity, you can't run with the herd. You need to get into a lot of good debt. It sounds scary until you realize that debt is tied to a carefully selected income property, meaning your entire debt payments are therefore reliably outsourced to tenants. DEBT, TAXES and inflation are three forces that make most people poorer. It makes most people poorer because they either don't have the resources, or they don't have the know how to arrange their financial life. They don't have any strategy. Well, today, you're learning how to make these three forces, DEBT, TAXES, inflation, those three wealthier with the Debase purchasing power of the dollar. You know most people, they see the price of a new car that goes from 50k to 60k or that their favorite Subway sandwich goes from nine bucks to 10 bucks, and then they just kind of hope that their salary keeps up. You know, that's sort of the average experience with inflation. Now, you and I, we would not save by stashing a million bucks under the mattress, because 3% inflation would de base its purchasing power by 30k every single year. That's why we do the opposite of saving. We borrow. For every million you borrow, we'll every year say that with inflation, your wage, salary, rent, income, all go higher by 3% now it gets easier to pay back your million dollar loan all while the tenant pays the interest, and you're profiting 30k each year. So after one year, you only owe the bank back 970k and inflation adjusted dollars and 940k after year two, and 910k after year three, inflation debases savings and debt at the same rate, so borrow instead of Save and see, this is the reason why the top selling financial author of all time, Robert Kiyosaki, a frequent guest on our show here, he says, savers are losers, debtors are winners. In an inflationary world, don't be a saver. Be a savvy debtor, because in the future, you can count on more inflation. See, the government needs inflation to occur. The easiest way for the US to repay its 10s of trillions of dollars in debt is to just keep printing lots of dollars, and that process debases every dollar that you're currently holding on to. Who cares about your debt when both tenants and inflation are just relentlessly paying it down for you? That is if you're doing real estate right, which means buying an income producing property with a loan. That's the whole formula here. That's all we're doing, buying a rental property with a loan. But when you understand how inflation both pumps up your real estate value and simultaneously debases your debt, it turns your world upside down, you almost become this inflation cheerleader, because inflation is now good for you, as this audio course is now covering the fifth of five ways you're paid. Please understand some risk still exists. You could buy in the wrong market, hire the wrong property manager, or just buy the wrong property no matter what, you're going to have some inevitable problems along the way, like that plumbing problem I mentioned earlier in the second of five ways you're paid over leverage is a risk over leverage means that you take on so much debt that you can't make the monthly payments so you can still lose money. But from listening today, you vastly increase your chances of being profitable, and that's why we say that carefully bought real estate has the best risk adjusted return. Here we go, following through with our example across all five ways on your 200k income property that you made a 50k down payment on, that is therefore a $150,000 loan that you took out at a 3% inflation rate each year, your debt is then being debased by $4,500 this is a quiet, hidden wealth generator that most investors don't even know about. $4,500 of inflation profiting divided by your same 50k down payment means that you have another 9% rate of return. Wow, a 9% rate of return that you're getting that most investors don't even know about. I mean, in the conventional financial world, I mean, they're proud to offer you a nine. Percent mutual fund return over time, and they advertise that as something good here by putting a down payment on a rental property. This 9% is another sweetener that no one even notices, and that gets added on to everything else. It's just incredible. Yes, 9% now, in the past, I used to think this return was just the inflation rate that we're using here, 3% but see, this is leveraged as well a 9% return from inflation profiting. And like I mentioned, uh, towards the beginning of the show, this is the twist for a long time get rich education. Podcast listener, see 3% that would merely be a hedge. So add this 9% to the 29% running total in the first four ways, and there you have it, an astounding 38% total rate of return from the five ways that real estate pays 38% I mean, you are really understanding why wealthy people's money either starts out or ends up in real estate, and that you don't have to be wealthy to start everything we discussed there was in year one. I mean, if someone asks you why you're investing in real estate, you can just hold up five fingers and share this episode with them. I mean, this says it all, and we could have surely come up with a higher number than 38% if you had used a 20% down payment instead of 25 then you'd have more leverage, and your total ROI would be in the mid 40s percent, and we really handled the tax portion conservatively. Here another reason your return could be higher, this was with a 7% mortgage rate and a pretty modest 4% cash on cash return as well. Yes, your total ROI is 38% now after year one returns fall over time due to the accumulation of equity in your property, so the denominator for the calculation is larger. You got 38% in year one, perhaps year two is 31% and year three is 24% but you can really see how you're getting ahead of the world in three years like that in other episodes of the show. Here, I do talk about how to limit the return attrition through refinancing and some other techniques, but these are amazing rates of return, compounding evidence that compound leverage blows away compound interest, and again, it's DEBT, TAXES and inflation that are making you wealthy. How you should know by now the formula is really simple. Just buy an income producing property with an everyday 30 year loan, even if real estate values fall, you can get paid for other ways and still have a positive return. Real estate values have always bounced back even after 2008 and see if the property is temporarily suppressed in value, you're going to have little concern with wanting to sell it when tenants are still paying you a monthly income during that time. Very few veteran real estate investors understand the five ways. Most real estate educators don't understand this either, but now you do, and to get this 38% total ROI again at times I simplified throughout I mean, your real world return is likely going to be different. It's going to be higher or lower than 38% probably. But now you know about a vehicle for actually creating durable wealth, and I would like to think that what you learned today is the most complete yet still concise way of understanding how a real estate investor gets paid. You gotta know this. This is the motivation for wanting to do this in the first place.    And hey, if you like what I've shared so far, I'd love to ask you for something, and then I have more important things to tell you and give you your free gift. As I made this course free. Hey, if you would please just share the wealth. Share this episode with a friend. I'm sure you know somebody that would benefit from this. It's really a big aha moment when you finally know how it all goes together. If you subscribe to our newsletter, you were already sent the video version of this course here in just the past couple weeks that's going to help you see how all the numbers go together. And the video course was also released free on YouTube, so if you're listening to this within a few weeks or months of the episodes release, it's still easy to find on our get rich education YouTube channel and four. Finally, in order to make this actionable and actually profit from what you learned, you can just copy me and buy properties from where I buy them at GRE marketplace, that's where there are properties conducive to the five ways you're paid. It probably does take about a minimum, oh, of a 35k to 55k down payment in order to get started. Properties are either new build or renovated. Tenants are in place. There's a property management solution, if you like, and optionally, our free investment coaching service there learns your goals, then helps match you with the right areas and properties and hey, I'm happy to tell you and announce that you can now connect directly with our completely free investment coaching service at GREinvestment coach.com, yes, this is a new URL to make it easier for you to connect with a GRE investment coach. Yeah, I kind of thought that was a good one, huh? How do you connect with a free GRE investment coach? Well, at GREinvestment coach.com I've got a free gift for you. Everything that we discussed in this course today was distilled down into one colorful infographic that we designed and laid out here so you can view it, download it, or even print it out on one eight and a half by 11 inch sheet of paper. Yeah, my team and I went back and forth on this infographic for quite a few rounds to make it just right. I like how it looks, and I've never known anyone else to do this all the ways real estate pays concisely onto one sheet of paper. The link for that infographic gift is in the show notes for this episode at get rich education.com/ 550 since this is episode 550 get it at getrice education.com/ 550 Yeah, the infographic gift is a memento of this course and the time that we spent together today. Think of it as your diploma, and it's a diploma that doesn't come with 12 years of student loan payments either. Yes, it is just a piece of paper, but is it worth more than the piece of paper known as your bachelor's degree or your MBA? I don't know. You can be the judge. So congrats, graduate. Now you know how real estate makes ordinary people wealthy, but learning this today really doesn't benefit you if you don't find the right property in the right market with a property manager. If you so choose a property manager, you've got to take action. You usually want to start small, including with investor advantage, single family rentals for as little as 200k just like our example, some cost even less. We will help you do just that, and do it for free with our coaching book a time and get it on the calendar at GREinvestmentcoach.com that's GREinvestmentcoach.com    I'm get rich education's Keith Weinhold, thanks for being here, but you weren't here for me. You were here for you. I'll see you next week. Don't quit your daydream.   Speaker 3  48:25   nothing on this show should be considered specific, personal or professional advice. Please consult an appropriate tax, legal, real estate, financial or business professional for individualized advice. Opinions of guests are their own. Information is not guaranteed. All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss. The host is operating on behalf of get rich Education LLC exclusively.   Keith Weinhold  48:49   You know, whenever you want the best written real estate and finance info, oh, geez, today's experience limits your free articles access, and it's got paywalls and pop ups and push notifications and cookies disclaimers, it's not so great. So then it's vital to place nice, clean, free content into your hands that adds no hype value to your life. That's why this is the golden age of quality newsletters, and I write every word of ours, my self, it's got a dash of humor, and it's to the point, because even the word abbreviation is too long, my letter usually takes less than three minutes to read, and when you start the letter, you also get my one hour fast real estate video. Course, it's all completely free. It's called the Don't quit your Daydream. Letter, it wires your mind for wealth, and it couldn't be easier for you to get it right now. Just text GRE to 66866, while it's on your mind, take a moment to do it right now. Text GRE to 66866.   The preceding program was brought to you by your home for wealth, building, get rich, education.com.  

Have high interest rates and home prices affected your ability to buy cash-flowing real estate deals? If you're struggling to find properties that pencil out, you don't want to miss this episode. If there's anyone who can teach you how to find great deals, even in this housing market, it's today's guest. He wrote the book on it! Welcome back to the Real Estate Rookie podcast! Today, we're joined by fellow investor, On the Market co-host, and author of Real Estate Deal Maker, Henry Washington. Given today's difficult market conditions, is Henry pivoting to another investing strategy? Nope! He's sticking to “boring,” single-family and multifamily properties that he either rents out to tenants or flips for a profit. But he is changing how he analyzes deals, and he'll show YOU how to do the same in today's episode! Stay tuned if you want to know how to buy your first or next rental property in 2025. Henry will show you the four-step approach he uses to find undervalued deals today and how to buy discounted properties from builders looking to move old inventory. But that's not all. You'll also learn how to fund these deals using small local banks, retirement accounts, and other people's money (OPM)! In This Episode We Cover: The four-step “shotgun” approach to finding real estate deals in today's market Why the way you analyze deals must evolve (even if your strategy doesn't!) Creative ways to source “undervalued,” off-market real estate deals in any market How to fund your next property by leveraging your retirement accounts Buying discounted properties from builders looking to “offload” inventory How to get your spouse on board with your real estate investing goals And So Much More! Links from the Show Ashley's BiggerPockets Profile Tony's BiggerPockets Profile Join BiggerPockets for FREE Real Estate Rookie Facebook Group Real Estate Rookie YouTube Follow Real Estate Rookie on Instagram Ask Your Question for a Future Rookie Reply “Like” Real Estate Rookie on Facebook Follow Real Estate Rookie on Instagram Henry's Instagram Grab Henry's Book, “Real Estate Deal Maker” Sign Up for the Real Estate Rookie Newsletter Find Investor-Friendly Lenders 5 Ways to Find Off-Market Real Estate Deals Like a Pro (00:00) Intro (00:45) Breaking Into Real Estate (03:18) Funding His First Deal (08:48) Analyzing Deals in THIS Market (12:48) “Conservative” Underwriting 101 (22:18) How to Find Deals TODAY (29:57) Getting a Spouse on Board (37:34) Connect with Henry! Check out more resources from this show on BiggerPockets.com and https://www.biggerpockets.com/blog/rookie-543 Interested in learning more about today's sponsors or becoming a BiggerPockets partner yourself? Email advertise@biggerpockets.com.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sarah Isgur and David French review the Trump administration's latest executive order targeting law firms, the legal challenge against the White House's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act, and the problems surrounding universal injunctions. The Agenda: —David's dangerous brush with nature —Trump's non-strategic executive orders against law firms —Can the courts review a proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act? —Is immigration an “invasion”? —OPM ain't got no standing —Sued for cracking, then sued for packing (in a redistricting case) —The 0-9 prediction on nondelegation case Show Notes: —Executive order against Jenner & Block —Executive order against WilmerHale Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings, click here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Friday, March 28th, 2025Today, a Tufts University grad student was snatched off the street by unmarked cops wearing masks; Judge Reyes rejects the Pentagon's new guidance for banning transgender people from serving in the military; Trump has pulled his nomination of Elise Stefanik for UN ambassador; Kari Lake backs down in the legal fight to shutter Radio Free Europe; Judge Boasberg holds his first hearing in the Signalgate lawsuit filed by American Oversight; the US sent a married father with no criminal record to CECOT on a paperwork error; RFK Jr has announced massive cuts to Health and Human Services; the US is going to end vaccine funding for children in poor countries; Canada ends their Tesla rebate program as Trump hits auto manufacturers with tariffs; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Guest:John FugelsangTell Me Everything — John FugelsangThe John Fugelsang PodcastSiriusXM ProgressThank You, Naked WinesTo get 6 bottles of wine for $39.99, head to nakedwines.com/DAILYBEANS and use code DAILYBEANS for both the code and password.Thank You, Fast Growing TreesGet 15% off your first purchase.  FastGrowingTrees.com/dailybeans.Stories:Turkish student at Tufts University detained, video shows masked people handcuffing her | AP NewsTrump administration backs down in legal fight to shutter Radio Free Europe | The IndependentRFK Jr. announces big cuts to Department of Health and Human Services | The Washington PostTrump to impose 25% tariff on all imported vehicles and foreign-made auto parts | NBC NewsFederal Court Rejects Another Trump Administration Attempt to Implement the Transgender Military Ban | GLAD LawU.S. to End Vaccine Funds for Poor Countries | The New York TimesU.S. sent Venezuelan man with pending political asylum case to El Salvador mega prison | Miami HeraldCanada bars Tesla from rebate program over Trump tariffs | The HillGood Trouble: Some might have noticed that the HR at OPM.gov email address had started kicking back five things you did last week emails because the inbox was full. This might be because of a targeted spam attack on the inbox. So in that spirit, we have another email address for you. osd.pr11@mail.mil#AltGov: the secret network of federal workers resisting Doge from the inside | Trump administration | The GuardianTrump and Musk are attempting an illegal power grab is a crisis we must stop. HandsOff2025.comTeslaTakedown — Join the March 29 GLOBAL DAY OF ACTION From The Good NewsThe Resizters - BandFind Your Representative | house.govSusan Crawford for Supreme CourtVolunteer Opportunities, Events, and Petitions · WisDems on MobilizeCluster of Craft - etsyReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! Federal workers - feel free to email me at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen.Share your Good News or Good Trouble:https://www.dailybeanspod.com/good/ Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Substack|Muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote, Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewrote, BlueSky|@muellershewroteDana GoldbergTwitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, IG|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.com, BlueSky|@dgcomedyHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/Patreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts

The BRRRR strategy is arguably the fastest way to build wealth with real estate. Just ask Leka Devatha, a Seattle-based investor. She's got ONE BRRRR property this year that could make her $600,000 in profit. And that's ONE home, not an apartment complex. So what is the BRRRR strategy, and why do so many investors write it off instead of trying it in 2025? Are they missing out? Absolutely! BRRRR stands for buy, rehab, rent, refinance, repeat. The basic formula is this: buy a house that needs some improvement, renovate the home (to a scale you're comfortable with), rent out the home to tenants now that it's fixed up, and refinance it. Now that the property is worth more, you may be able to get the bank to pay YOU back your initial down payment and renovation costs due to the increase in equity. Then…repeat until you're financially free. How do you pull off a BRRRR in 2025 with high interest rates, high home prices, and rising renovation costs? Dave and Leka are walking through their own BRRRR deals, showing you how to successfully BRRRR and do it without using ANY of your own money (seriously!). In This Episode We Cover: The BRRRR strategy explained and whether it still works in 2025 Leka's BRRRR deals making her up to $600K! The best property types for BRRRRing to get more cash flow, higher appreciation, and bigger returns  How to use other people's money (OPM) to fund your BRRRR investments  The “DADU” strategy that could skyrocket your home price with one savvy addition  And So Much More! Links from the Show Join BiggerPockets for FREE Let Us Know What You Thought of the Show! Ask Your Question on the BiggerPockets Forums BiggerPockets YouTube Apply to Be a BiggerPockets Podcast Guest! Maximize Your Real Estate Investing with a Self-Directed IRA from Equity Trust Save $100 on Real Estate's Biggest Event of the Year, BPCon2025 Grab the BRRRR Book Sign Up for the BiggerPocket Real Estate Newsletter Find Investor-Friendly Lenders What is the BRRRR Method & How to Use it to Invest in Real Estate Connect with Leka Connect with Dave (00:00) Intro (03:42) BRRRR Strategy Explained (05:38) How to Boost Home Value (08:47) BRRRRing with No Money (12:50) Using Other People's Money (15:39) Refinancing Your BRRRR (18:39) Real 2025 BRRRR Examples (23:03) Best BRRRR Property Types (26:08) The Secret to Finding Deals Check out more resources from this show on BiggerPockets.com and https://www.biggerpockets.com/blog/real-estate-1091 Interested in learning more about today's sponsors or becoming a BiggerPockets partner yourself? Email advertise@biggerpockets.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices