Rental deal in Buenos Aires: ARS 1,406,000,000 purchase, ARS 8,012,000/month — sanity check

[shareTheSignal]

ARS 8,012,000 a month is the figure driving this decision. Against a purchase price of ARS 1,406,000,000 for the 2-bed serviced apartment in Buenos Aires, the gross yield is about 6.8%, so the treatment of operating costs matters more than market averages.

I have budgeted for empty periods, management, routine repairs and a larger future job. I have not assumed any appreciation. Before going further, I need to verify insurance, tenant-change costs, common charges, the building reserve and any planned shared work. I also need to separate anything bundled into the rent, such as cleaning, utilities or furnishing replacement.

Would you first validate the ARS 8,012,000 rent and how it can reprice, or concentrate on actual building statements and management costs? I’m trying to establish a defensible net return rather than rely on the headline percentage.

 

[teaAndPath]

The gross arithmetic checks out, but 6.8% does not leave much room for surprises. I would stress the building’s recurring common charges and any extraordinary owner contributions, rather than relying only on a reserve inside your apartment model. Ask for actual building expense statements, the current reserve position and details of planned work. Property tax and insurance should also come from current quotes, not broad assumptions.

 

[leo_equity]

How is the ARS 8,012,000 rent set, and how often can it change? A nominal net-yield target is hard to interpret without knowing whether rent and major expenses reprice on similar timelines. Also, does the expected rent include utilities, cleaning, furnishing replacement or other serviced-apartment costs? Those can otherwise appear partly as management and partly as turnover, which makes the model look safer than it is.

 

[clear_wall]

I would not assume the building reserve is automatically the largest blind spot. For a serviced apartment, vacancy between occupants, cleaning, minor damage and furnishing replacement can compound quickly even when the building itself is fine.

Run three cases using the same purchase price: expected occupancy, a longer turnover gap, and a combined vacancy-plus-building-repair year. Then add financing separately, if any, because borrowing can overwhelm a modest unlevered margin. I would choose the required net yield only after seeing that downside case; the headline 6.8% alone is not enough to set a sensible hurdle.