Clk.sh is a newly launched trusted link shortener network, it is a sister site of shrinkearn.com. I like ClkSh because it accepts multiple views from same visitors. If any one searching for Top and best url shortener service then i recommend this url shortener to our users. Clk.sh accepts advertisers and publishers from all over the world. It offers an opportunity to all its publishers to earn money and advertisers will get their targeted audience for cheapest rate. While writing ClkSh was offering up to $8 per 1000 visits and its minimum cpm rate is $1.4. Like Shrinkearn, Shorte.st url shorteners Clk.sh also offers some best features to all its users, including Good customer support, multiple views counting, decent cpm rates, good referral rate, multiple tools, quick payments etc. ClkSh offers 30% referral commission to its publishers. It uses 6 payment methods to all its users.
Ouo.io is one of the fastest growing URL Shortener Service. Its pretty domain name is helpful in generating more clicks than other URL Shortener Services, and so you get a good opportunity for earning more money out of your shortened link. Ouo.io comes with several advanced features as well as customization options. With Ouo.io you can earn up to $8 per 1000 views. It also counts multiple views from same IP or person. With Ouo.io is becomes easy to earn money using its URL Shortener Service. The minimum payout is $5. Your earnings are automatically credited to your PayPal or Payoneer account on 1st or 15th of the month.
Linkbucks is another best and one of the most popular sites for shortening URLs and earning money. It boasts of high Google Page Rank as well as very high Alexa rankings. Linkbucks is paying $0.5 to $7 per 1000 views, and it depends on country to country. The minimum payout is $10, and payment method is PayPal. It also provides the opportunity of referral earnings wherein you can earn 20% commission for a lifetime. Linkbucks runs advertising programs as well.
LINK.TL is one of the best and highest URL shortener website.It pays up to $16 for every 1000 views.You just have to sign up for free.You can earn by shortening your long URL into short and you can paste that URL into your website, blogs or social media networking sites, like facebook, twitter, and google plus etc. One of the best thing about this site is its referral system.They offer 10% referral commission.You can withdraw your amount when it reaches $5.
CPMlink is one of the most legit URL shortener sites.You can sign up for free.It works like other shortener sites.You just have to shorten your link and paste that link into the internet.When someone will click on your link. You will get some amount of that click.It pays around $5 for every 1000 views.They offer 10% commission as the referral program.You can withdraw your amount when it reaches $5.The payment is then sent to your PayPal, Payza or Skrill account daily after requesting it.
Short.am provides a big opportunity for earning money by shortening links. It is a rapidly growing URL Shortening Service. You simply need to sign up and start shrinking links. You can share the shortened links across the web, on your webpage, Twitter, Facebook, and more. Short.am provides detailed statistics and easy-to-use API. It even provides add-ons and plugins so that you can monetize your WordPress site. The minimum payout is $5 before you will be paid. It pays users via PayPal or Payoneer. It has the best market payout rates, offering unparalleled revenue. Short.am also run a referral program wherein you can earn 20% extra commission for life.
Adf.ly is the oldest and one of the most trusted URL Shortener Service for making money by shrinking your links. Adf.ly provides you an opportunity to earn up to $5 per 1000 views. However, the earnings depend upon the demographics of users who go on to click the shortened link by Adf.ly. It offers a very comprehensive reporting system for tracking the performance of your each shortened URL. The minimum payout is kept low, and it is $5. It pays on 10th of every month. You can receive your earnings via PayPal, Payza, or AlertPay. Adf.ly also runs a referral program wherein you can earn a flat 20% commission for each referral for a lifetime.
As part of the Breakthrough battle the front could allocate elements of Frontal aviation in support of the depth fire battle enabling the simultaneous engagement of the enemy throughout his depth and to increase the effectiveness of the engagement of the enemy in the immediate combat zone.
Frontovaya Aviatsiya FA was the largest component of Soviet Air Power comprising some 5,000 aircraft and 5,000 helicopters distributed across 16 Air Armies. A Tactical Air Army was an integral part of a Front which for the purposes of my Cold War representation consisted of 2 Combined Arms Armies, 1 Tank Army and 1 Tactical Air Army.
The purpose of Frontal Aviation was to provide Air Support to the front throughout the fronts area of operations and the enemies depth this area can be described as a box approximately 300km wide to 500km deep. In addition to the ability to deliver Air to Ground attack from Aircraft or Helicopters, the Air Army also possessed Reconnaissance, Electronic Warfare, Air Superiority and Transport Assets.
The Primary role was Air Support to the Ground Operation with the Tactical Air Army being subordinate to the Front, the other assets within the Air Army, Fighter Divisions and Reconnaissance Regiments, being used to create the conditions under which this could occur. The principal uses of the Air Armys assets were:
Striking targets beyond the range of Artillery
Increasing tempo by adding air delivered ordnance to direct and indirect fires
adding flexibility through quick response in fluid tactical situations
Composition, Organisation and Equipment The Various Air Armies composition varied depending on where they were. Based on Suverovs model of the Front and his view on the force composition and structure in the Forward Group of Forces then 16 Air Army would split into two with one supporting each of the two fronts.
An outline composition for an Air Army supporting a single front could look like this:
3 Fighter Divisions ( IAD )Mig-23 Flogger, Mig-29 Fulcrum (90% of the Force),
1 Helicopter Transport Regiment (OVP) Mi-24, Mi8, Mi-6
1 Mixed Helicopter Regiment (OVP) Mi-8, Mi-6/26
Aircraft are organised in flights of 4 with 3 Flights to a Squadron (12) and 3 Squadrons to a Regiment (36) and 3 Regiments to a division (108). There was some mixing of aircraft types within Squadrons and regiments but in general a regiment tended to operate aircraft of a single type for fighter, Fighter Bomber. The range of aircraft covers the types that could have been used against the role stated at the back end of the Cold War.
Like Artillery covered in the last Post on Breakthrough operations the great thing about Aircraft is that they are very easy to concentrate on an axis or in support of a mission and can add considerable weight of fire at critical moments in the battle.
weapon systems
A wide range of air to ground munitions were available to fighter ground attack aircraft in the late 80's. Like NATO the Soviets had been improving the effectiveness of aerial delivered munitions through both precision guidance from the air, precision guidance from the ground and the development of a range of Scatterable mine and submunition capabilities. The critical developments from the perspective of Breakthrough were those that could be used to break down a formed defence and could be used to replace the dependence on Nuclear weapons seen in the 60's. To my mind this puts the focus on the improvement of bombs rather than in developments of Surface to air missiles which because of cost and availability would tend to be used on higher value targets.
Guided Bombs
The Soviets developed a range of precision guided munitions in the late 70s and by 1979 had deployed a number of 500kg Laser Guided Bombs these included Bunker Busters, HE-Frag and Thermobaric munitions. These systems were used in Afghanistan and by 1987 they had up scaled these to include 1500kg bombs.
Collectively known as KAB (Korrektirujemaja Aviacionnaja Bomba) the weapons have a significant stand off range. The KAB-500 series having a maximum range of 10 km and can be delivered by MiG-27K, Su-22M3/M4, Su-24M and Su-25. The KAB – 1500 series can be from altitudes of 1 km to 15 km providing a maximum standoff of 18 - 20 km from the higher altitudes with the delivery platforms being primarily the Su 24 during the Cold War.
KAB-1500L-Pr-E Penetrating bunker buster with sub calibre war head
KAB-1500L-F-E Blast Fragmentation warhead
KAB-1500-OD-E Thermobaric warhead
The LGB - KAB 500 L was deployed from 1979 and the KAB 1500 L from 1987 the weapons used a semi active homer which delivered a 7m CEP they were Air Designated and I have found no reference to ground designation. The improved LG variants were not delivered until after the end of the Cold War.
The 4.5m long KAB-1500L guided bomb is a bit of a beast designed to hit stationary ground and surface targets, these include:
Railway and Motorway Bridges
Dams
Defence Enterprise
Large Ammunition Depots
Fuel and Lubricant Storage
Railway Junctions
In my mind it would also be a useful weapon to deploy against static battlefield targets such as defended positions and as such offers the potential to deliver Nuclear like effects from a more conventional platform.
The TV Guided KAB 500 KR and KAB 1500TK entered service from 1987 and delivered an improved 4m CEP. The Satellite guided systems were not deployed until 2003 so more Bear Resurgent than Cold War. The SU 24 cleared for 3 KAB 1500 or 7 KAB 500 with the Su 17 capable of carrying 2 KAB 500
Cluster Bombs
The other set of weapons of interest in the Breakthrough context are Cluster Bombs. Cluster munitions release or eject smaller submunitions and were deployed extensively by all sides during the Cold War, primarily they increased the area of effect of the payload and more efficiently distribute the effects within that area than a single equivalent sized bomb can achieve. As such they are more efficient at engaging area targets. The Soviet Union was a pioneer in the development of the Cluster bomb with use from the 1930's, The principal family of munitions available to them in the Cold War was the RBK 250 family of bombs. Sub Munitions carried include:
Anti Personnel AO 2.5RT 2.8Kg Pre fragmented, designed to split on impact bounce then explode.
Anti Personnel AO-1 SCh,
Anti Personnel PFM-1 2.5 lbs, AP Mine
Anti Tank PTAB 2.5, 5lbs Heat
Airfield Cratering
The RBK Razovaya Bombovaya Kasseta is a single use bomb cassette which could then be loaded with a number of sub munitions generally either the fragmentation or Anti Tank sub munitions.
In the 1990s details of a larger and improved RBK 500 bomb were released with new sub munitions its not clear if these were available in the later years of the Cold War. But if like me you stretch the back end of the Cold War though to 1993 when the Soviets withdrew from Germany then they fit. New sub munitions included:
AO-2.5 RTM pre fragmented anti personel/anti materiel
BETAB airfield Cratering cluster bomb
PTAB-1M anti tank, 2lbs Heat penetrates 9" of steel fin stabilised
SPBE anti tank, 30 lbs anti tank with EFP warhead, Drouge stabilised
SPBE-D anti tank
The munitions can be carried by Mig 23/27, 29, Su 17, 24, 25, 27
Command and Control
The Soviet system to control air assets in the fronts area of operations occurred at two levels. The first of these dealt with the routing of aircraft to and from their missions and the second the allocation of assets to missions and the prosecution and selection of targets.
The Control and Target Identification post was equipped with Radar and signals equipment and communicated with the air assets to control their movement, it was primarily a battlefield air traffic control system which had no role in mission planning. The forward air liaison teams deployed to the forward CPs at each level of command from front to regiment and occasional battalion dealt with the target selection and prosecution of engagements. The Air assets like artillery assets could be allocated in support of specific formations and units and I suspect it is these units that received the Forward Air Liaison teams. Targeting like artillery would be conducted through the direction of assets by the controlling HQ ie the combined arms commander in conjunction with the Liaison team, rather than by request.
The Air Controllers at Regimental level would clear targets and identify friendly troop locations for attacking aircraft, these air controllers were usually experienced Pilots, I have yet to find any evidence of ground target marking capability. All the teams would be equipped with either BTR Series or MT-LBu command and Observation post vehicles which were supplied to both artillery and air observation parties, the specific BTR 60 variant being the BTR 60R-975.
The Soviets tend to employ aircraft to engage deeper targets and aviation to attack closer targets all though assets of both types will be utilised for pre planned operations and air delivered fire strikes can be used to superimpose fire effect on top of artillery fires.
Modeling and Gaming
The purpose of the research was of course to enable me to expand the Soviet horde to include some air support that could help deliver some serious effects on to the NATO position in the event of a breakthrough battle developing on a table top near me. To this end I will be adding:
2 Su 17 representing two flights of 4 Su 17 equipped with Kab - 500L and CBUs from the IBAP
1 Su 24 representing 1 Flight of 4 Su 24 equiped with 2 Kab - 1500L and CBUs from the ADIB
1 BTR 60 Forward Air Control Command and Observation Post
Having spent the time researching the aircraft munitions it would be good to create models with the Weapon load outs required. Since I started writing this article back in 2014 a number of new weapons sets have been released along with a number of aftermarket resin accessories that enable that to be acheived the main ones I am using are:
For this project the main sets used are the Hasegawa Russia Weapons Set which supplied 2 Kab 1500Ls for the Su 24. The Dragon Modern Soviet Aircraft Weapons set 3, Rockets and Bombs which supplied the CBUs and the North Star Kab-500L set which supplied the load for the Su 17s.
when completed these birds will join my existing Frontal Aviation assets which include:
1 Mig 29 representing 1 flight of 4 aircraft from the IAD
1 Mig 23 representing 1 flight of 4 aircraft from the IAD
2 Su 25 representing 2 flights of 4 aircraft from the OShAP
2 Mig 27 representing 2 flights of 4 aircraft from the IBAP
5 Mi 24 representing an Attack Helicopter Sqn from the OBVP
5 Mi 8 representin an Assault Helicopter Sqn from the OBVP
4 Mi 8 representing a Medium Transport Helicopter Sqn from the OVP
2 Mi 24 and 1 Mi 6 representing a Heavy Transport Helicopter Sqn from the OVP
key elements of the Air Armies together with the DsHV and a range of Engineer capabilities were amongst those hit by the change to a more defensive doctrine in the late 80's as Glasnost and perestroika started to bite. I generally view this as a politically instigated doctrinal change motivated by the changing political landscape that evolved in the closing moments of the Cold War, in a timeline that would have led to war these changes may well have not occurred, it is also worth remembering that up scaling aircraft assets can be relatively easy given that the ground support and logistic elements can accommodate it. Which I suppose is my justification for playing late Cold War scenarios using assets such as those described in this post.
Scheduled for 2019, Aloft Studio unveils a first official video of its game "Hazelnut Bastille" and offers you to try a playable demo!
A worthy heir to Super Famicom games like "The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past"(from which it borrows the overworld, dungeons and progression system) and "Seiken Densetsu", Hazelnut Bastille, a top-down view 2D action-RPG game, looks like it came to visit us right from the early-to-mid 90s.
While waiting for a more accurate release date, the developers offer a playable demo in exchange for an inscription to their newsletter.
The first official trailer does not try to hide its obvious resemblance to Zelda 3!
When the DS first launched, Nintendo decided to port Super Mario 64 over to the handheld. This game is mostly the same except for a few mini games, a multiplayer mode, and some new playable characters. Over all, the port was a good one with the biggest downside being the adapted controls. It's difficult to configure analog controls with digital buttons.
In the next few years Nintendo released 3 "doubleganger siblings" or 3 platformers that have strong roots in the design of previous Nintendo Masterpieces. For these games the DS touch screen is mostly used for navigating menus and displaying large buttons. New Super Mario Brothers, Yoshi's Island DS, and Super Princess Peach are the doubleganger siblings that all fall short of their predecessor.
New Super Mario Brothers (NSMB) takes after Super Mario Brothers for the NES. Yoshi's Island DS (YIDS) is analogous to Super Mario World: Yoshi's Island for the SNES. And Super Princess Peach (SPP) is modeled after both of theses games. Understanding exactly how these games work compared to the console counterparts is more compliated than it seems. Handhelds are different devices than consoles and requires different design techniques and approaches. The reducsed screen size and aspect ratio is always an issue. Many were quick to judge some of these games as not having innovated, but there are sublte ways to innovate on a theme. Uncovering the structures for these games requires that we look at their structures starting with the core and moving outward.
NSMB starts off with the core of Super Mario Brothers: JUMP, DUCK, MOVE, RUN. Then additional abilities were added: WALL KICK, TRIPLE JUMP, GROUND POUND giving Mario then ability to platform/climb vertically in all new ways as well as destruct the level beneath him. From these expanded core abilities, the levels in NSMB were free to be designed in any direction. Consequently the developers felt free to take bits and pieces of level design from SMB, SMB3, and SMW. The flat level layouts belong to SMB. Some of the bosses and left & right scrolling levels hearken back to SMB3. The world map, chain fences, bosses, and ghost houses can be traced back to SMW.
After drawing from these 3 excellent games, you would think that NSMB would be the most "Mario" Mario game. When I first played it, I enjoyed the game but wasn't very impressed. Now, after studying SMB, SMB3, and SMW more closely, I can appreciate the blend that is NSMB more.
PROS
Blue Shell, tiny mushroom, big mushroom are the new powerups. The blue shell is genius taking the form of the turtle shell that we all know and understand by now and putting a Mario inside. All the interplay desinged into the shell is now under the player's control.
Levels can be designed to flow up, down, left, and right. The respawning enemies sort of created folded level movements when Mario travels backwards.
The camera zooms in an out appropriately. When the player needs to see more of what's ahead, the camera pulls back perfectly and smoothly. If Mario can't look before he leaps, then the game just wouldn't quite be Mario.
The camera also scrolls positioning Mario further left/back on the small DS screen than when on a TV screen like in SMB. Because in NSMB mario is 1/12th the size of the screen instead of 1/16, in order to see enough of the level coming, the screen had to pull back to compensate.
Some levels are truly inspired (7-3 & 7-5). They not quite like SMB, SMB3, or SMW making them distinctly NSMB.
Excellent multiplayer modes. Aside from the 4 player Mario Party type mini games, the 2 player side scrolling "battle mode" takes all of the gameplay from the single player in NSMB and pits two players against each other in a looping stage. Who knew all the interplay, mechanics, and folded design would come together so nicely in a multiplayer mode. It's examples like these that show that strong core design goes a long way for any type of game.
CONS
Pits and other level hazards are undermined with WALL KICKs. All pits are almost harmless because Mario can simply wall kick out of them. I found my self taunting the pits by intentionally jumping into them and seeing how low I could go while still being able to safely WALL KICK out. Fortunately, many levels have lava, poison water, and large pits so this strategies . On the plus side, being able to WALL KICK like this helps to minimize the reduced viability problem that all handheld platformers face.
Too many power ups/power ups in the bank. Because small pits are less of a problem, dying doesn't really happen. To make things worse, there are too many powerups in every level. Unlike in SMB, Mario can take 3 hits before dying from the fire flower powerup state. This extra cushion makes things easier for the player. But then, the player can to store a power up on the bottom screen and use it at any time. Powerups in previous Mario platformers used to be just rare enough so that players would charrish them. Now they're practically given away at every street corner.
Confused Difficulty Structure: In SMB, players had one clear shot from start to finish to try and beat the game. There were no save options. In SMB3, players had a bit of a cushion. If they lost all of their lives, they would simply start back at the beginng of the world not the game. This design gave the developers the leeway to make the levels trickier and harder. In both of htese games, the player couldn't go back and replay conquered levels. In SMW, players could save after ghost houses, bosses, and big switches dividing the save zones into even smaller sections. NSMB tries to have a linear overward like SMB, tricks to progression like SMB3, and save options similar to SMW. Compounded with the excess of powerups, NSMB difficulty doesn't come from progressing through the levels/game. Instead NSMB positions 3 coins per stage for the player to find and collect to increase the challenge.
Awkward saving. The limited number of saves in NSMB is awkard like Resident Evil. At some point, I found myself traveling to other world just so I could use a save station because I had run out of saves on the world I was previously in. The save system design has been opened up from the designs of Mario's previous games. There's no need to limit saves like this.
Some of the new enemies look terribly uninspired and un-Mario. ie. the hanging spiders, running punching ghost thing, the crows, and the pumpkins.
Yoshi's Island DS began with the Yoshi's Island core. MOVE, DUCK, JUMP, FLUTTER, MAKE EGGS, THROW EGGS, GROUND POUND, TONGUE, SPIT, rolling rocks, Piranha flowers, shy guys, flowers, and red coins. For the DS sequel, the developers looked at the character abilities, and decided to add character abilities via the babies riding on Yoshi's back. With the help of these infantile friends the player can now RUN, PARASOL GLIDE, SPIT FIRE BALL, CLIMB ON VINES, and MAGNET objects not to mention collect special character coins. More is better right? With such a solid core how can this game go wrong? It's all in the execution. You can't have a best core design with the worst level design. These two elements of a game depend on each other.
PROS
Reducing the running speed of Yoshi (except with Mario's special ability) was smart because Yoshi takes up 1/35th of the space on a single DS screen instead of 1/48th like on the SNES. Moving more slowly gives the player more time to react to the upcoming level.
Compensating for the DS screen gap creates a searching/adventure mechanic to the game. Yoshi can adjust the screen up or down by a distance equal to the gap between the DS screens by holding up or down. By hitting X and up/down, the player can shift the main screen of play to the top or bottom screen. This can reveal secrets and parts of the layout to the player.
Flutter is a genius way to make a downward "JUMP" mechanic, and to show how the different babies have different weights.
CONS
The level design can be quite terrible. The green falling blob level comes to mind. It seems like the developers just threw enemies and platforms together without play testing or tuning the elements to create a solid game idea.
Creating secret/specific paths that require a specific baby adds unnecessary back tracking the way the baby switching is set up. The unique baby abilities are fine, but the elements that require a specific baby ultimately results in having to memorize areas of the stage for the next pass through or backtrack to get the right baby.
The levels don't have large governing game ideas. They seem to be in service of the secrets and even those seem forced and artificially placed in the level.
The new enemies/character look like they were designed/drawn by a child.
Super Princess Peach starts with core mechanics from NSMB and YIDS (MOVE/RUN, JUMP, DUCK, WALK, POUNDBRELLA) with some of the more unique mechanics being functionally analogous (TONGUE = PICK UP, MAKE EGGS = EAT, FLUTTER = FLOATBRELLA). The enemies and level elements are also very similar: Goomba, Paratroopers, Pirahna Flowers, warp pipes, springs, and informative-talking help blocks. SPP even encourages players to collect toads scattered throughout each level like the flowers from Yoshi's Island.
PROS
Primary Function: Understanding and using one's emotions. Each emotional state (Joy, Gloom, Rage, and Calm) have various effects on Peach and/or the environment. Understanding theses effects and using them to progress is the core gimmick of SPP. What's also interesting is that the image of Peach on the bottom screen displays Peaches emotional states and Peach's "woman's intuition." By paying attention to Peach's expression, the player can tune into Peaches more subtle emotions.
Emotions is the lens through which the whole game is filtered. Not only must the player understand Peach's emotional states, but the emotions of the enemies as well. Like Peach's 5 emotional states (including neutral state) the enemies can also exhibit emotional states. With each state, the enemy's behavior changes. Mad enemies are more aggressive. Calm enemies sleep giving Peach the chance to sneak up on them. Glad enemies walk around with their eyes closed and a song in their hearts and will occasionally jump for joy to throw off the player's timing.
Nice adjustable difficulty by purchasing upgrades with coins. Just like in Mario Galaxy, there's a balance in how one kills an enemy and the rewards one gains. Jumping on an enemy versus using the homing stomp is harder and rewards the player with life restoring coins. In SPP, killing the enemies with umbrella attacks is riskier and rewards the player with coins. To balance this, player forfeits the opportunity to PICK UP and EAT the enemies to restore their vibe (emotion) meter.
Due to the similarities with the core Mario design, SPP features the same basic counterpoint that Mario does.
CONS
The broken, piecemeal level design is often very circular and very confusing. By taking too many warp pipes from one section to another the organic, cohesive design of the level is demolished.
The touch screen mini game levels that precede each boss are neat enough the first time, but become annoying when they're repeated.
The emotion states are simply not dynamic enough. There are several obstacles throughout each level that obviously require the use of a specific emotion to overcome, but other than these areas SPP doesn't use or layer the emotion mechanics at all. The water from the Gloom state and the fire from the Rage state should have much more dynamic effects on the environment/enemies.
The level design didn't focus on the Mario mechanics, and couldn't focus on the emotion mechanics because of their lack of dynamics. SPP sits in a state in between familiar greatness and great potential, and falls short of both.
SPP should have been designed as more of a puzzle/platformer focusing on the emotion mechanics instead of an action/platformer.
You might already be investing in the stock market, whether your goal is to fund an upcoming splurge or enjoy a relaxing retirement.
But investing in real estate? That's a whole different level of penny hoarding… right?
Considering the average price of a new home in America is a whopping $362,400, per Census data from November 2018, it's easy to think that real estate investments are out of reach for the average earner. Even a minimal 3% down payment on that amount is a five-figure sum!
But at the same time, investing in real estate is one of the most reliable ways to build wealth — and you don't have to buy a whole strip of office buildings or a swath of rental properties to do it.
In this post, we're going to cover how to invest in real estate with little or no money to start with, as well as some more creative ways to boost your earnings if you're getting ready to buy a home.
Why Investing in Real Estate Is a Good Idea
You might think that real estate investing is not only unaffordable, but also a plain old waste of time. Why sink so much money into buying property when there are so many other ways to generate cash flow?
Why is real estate such a good investment?
Well, for one thing, when it goes well, it goes really well. Smart real estate investing is one of the easiest ways to become a self-made millionaire. (Remember, though, that "easy" is relative.)
Even if you're not hoping to become rich Uncle Pennybags, investing in real estate is a great way to earn a passive, or at least semi-passive, income.
Depending on your approach, your investments could reap rewards with almost zero work on your end.
"Real estate offers a continuum of effort that the investor can put in," says Scott Trench — and he should know. He's a personal finance author, house-hacking guru (more on that in a sec!) and the CEO of BiggerPockets.
Oh, and did we mention he's a real estate investor whose properties have him on track for early retirement… even though he's yet to celebrate his 30th birthday?
"I like to think of it as a semi-passive business," Trench says.
When properly managed, investments like rental properties can earn help you earn a hefty paycheck for relatively little work — but it's also pretty easy to scale the business if you put that money back into your real estate projects.
If buying a whole house of your own is totally off the table, there's also passive real estate investment to consider: opportunities to put money into real estate without actually purchasing your own property.
In many cases, you can get started on this kind of real estate investing for less than $1,000, and the returns can be substantial.
But before we dive into some specific ways to invest in real estate, let's go over some key definitions. You've gotta talk the talk before you can walk the walk, whether it's Boardwalk or Park Place you're after!
Investing in Real Estate: The Lingo
Here are some of the most common terms you'll hear thrown around in real estate investing circles.
Residential real estate refers to properties designed to be used as places to live. Single-family homes, townhouses and condominiums all count — though homes with more than four units, like apartment buildings and large multiplexes, are considered commercial property.
Commercial real estate is property used for business purposes, such as restaurant and retail space or office buildings.
As mentioned above, extra-large residential buildings are also considered commercial real estate, since they're generally managed as businesses.
Industrial real estate is property where industrial businesses perform their functions, whether it's factory space, shipping yards or storage warehouses.
You probably already know this one, but a landlord is someone who owns property and leases it out to a third party, usually for residential or commercial use.
A landlord is also known as a lessor.
A lessee, then, is the person renting the property, who's also known as a tenant.
Rent is the money a landlord collects from the tenant as compensation for use of the property, usually taken on a monthly basis.
Appreciation is an asset's increase in value over time. Real estate is one of the only tangible investments whose value tends to appreciate.
Interest is the price charged by a lender for the service of providing a loan, expressed as a percentage of the loan amount.
For instance, according to CalculateStuff.com's APR calculator, if a borrower takes a $150,000 loan with a 5% APR interest rate, and repays the balance over a 30-year period, that borrower will end up paying the lender back a total of $289,885.27.
That means the lender earns $139,885.27 in interest! (Not a bad payoff, huh? But pretty scary from the borrower's perspective!)
How to Invest in Real Estate: 3 Ways You May Not Have Thought of Yet
The most obvious way to get involved with real estate investing is, of course, to actually purchase property. And we're going to go into that investment option in a few minutes.
But what if you want a piece of the real estate investing pie without signing a mortgage — or ever having to respond to a tenant's 3 a.m. plumbing crisis?
There are actually a variety of passive real estate investment tactics that require nothing but your money. And you don't necessarily have to have very much of it to start.
Just like investing in stocks, these real estate investment approaches allow you to earn money on the appreciation of the properties you're backing… without requiring you to actually purchase or manage the property yourself.
1. Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)
A real estate investment trust is a company whose bread and butter is purchasing commercial real estate, with the express intent of funding properties that generate income.
REITs then sell shares of those real estate investments to outside investors, who earn money in the form of dividends.
In short, it's just like investing in the stock market: You put your money on the table to back the company, and you reap returns when the company does well.
In this case, though, the company's sole mission is to own, operate and finance real estate. So you're basically buying tiny portions of a variety of different properties you may never even see or set foot on.
Depending on the type of REIT you're talking about, you may be able to buy into the game for very little money.
Private REITs aren't traded on the stock market, which means they're generally unavailable to the average investor. With high fees and higher minimum investments, this is the domain of accredited investors with substantial net worth.
Publicly traded REITs, however, are available on the stock market — and if you have a brokerage account and enough capital to buy a share, you can go ahead and add it to your investment portfolio. However, these REITs do see substantial market volatility just like regular stocks, so it's definitely not a risk-free investment.
There are also public, non-traded REITs, which aren't available on the stock market but are registered with the SEC, or U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. They sometimes carry high investment fees and minimums, but not always, and so may occasionally be an option for the average investor.
2. Crowdfunded Real Estate Investing
If you're familiar with platforms like Kickstarter or Patreon, you already understand how crowdfunding works.
We found a company that helps you do just that for real estate.
You don't have to have hundreds of thousands of dollars. You can get started with a minimum investment of just $500. A company called Fundrise does all the heavy lifting for you.
Through theFundrise Starter Portfolio, your money will be split into two portfolios that support private real estate around the United States.
3. Private Equity Funds and Opportunity Zone Funds
Private equity funds work kind of like mutual funds — or the crowdfunding platforms we just mentioned, but at a higher, less grassroots level.
They still work by pooling the assets of many investors to make high-value investments but are generally limited to accredited investors who can put down at least $100,000.
Opportunity zone funds are another type of pooled-asset investment strategy, but they're specifically geared toward backing developments in economically distressed U.S. neighborhoods.
Because they help stimulate needed growth in those areas, they're subject to some pretty appealing tax incentives — especially if you leave your money in the fund for a substantial period of time.
For instance, if you retain an opportunity zone fund holding for five years, your tax liability on capital gains (i.e., earnings made through appreciation) is reduced 10%. If you retain it seven years, the reduction is bumped to 15% — and if you can afford to leave the money tied up for a decade, you won't pay any capital gains taxes.
That makes backing opportunity zone funds a very interesting option indeed for a qualified investor looking for a long-term investment opportunity.
But again, depending on the fund you choose, you may be subject to an investment minimum of as much as $250,000.
Investing in Real Estate the Old-School Way: Buying Property
If you are on board to become a bona fide property owner — the kind who can actually put the key in the door — there are ways to make buying a home, which is already usually a smart money move, into an even smarter investment.
For those of you ready to sign a mortgage (or even buy a house in cash!), here are some income-generating tactics to consider as you enter the real estate market.
House Hacking
Ever dream of living rent- (or mortgage-) free?
House hacking is all about making that dream possible. (And it's also how Scott Trench, the real estate investor we mentioned above, got his start.)
Basically, you find a property that you can simultaneously live in and rent — in many cases, a duplex with two separate living areas.
You then use the money you earn as a landlord to eradicate your mortgage payments quickly, ideally eclipsing your monthly payment entirely.
Trench in particular used house hacking as a ladder to get his start as landlord with multiple rental properties.
After he paid off his first duplex, the rent he was earning was pure profit, which he was then able to reinvest in more properties… which earned him even more rent. (Genius, right?)
The best part of house hacking is that it takes a necessary living expense — i.e., keeping a roof over your head — and turns it into an earning opportunity.
So if you're already looking to buy a home of your own, you may as well see if you can find one that's hackable.
House Flipping
If you've ever magically lost an hour or three of your life by watching the nigh-pornographic property transformations on HGTV, you're probably familiar with house flipping.
And your experience of that rags-to-riches story doesn't have to be limited to the TV screen. If you're relatively handy and have an understanding of real estate values, you could try the tactic yourself.
The way it works is pretty simple, on the surface: You purchase an investment property that could use some TLC — a "fixer-upper," in common parlance — and put in the repairs and remodels necessary to make it nice and shiny.
The value of the house goes up, at which point you can sell the property for a profit.
It's important to note, however, that this is one of the most work-intensive ways to invest in real estate. And you do stand to lose a whole lot of money if you don't do it right.
Renovations are already expensive, and if the house sits empty on the market, you could lose even more money — both in opportunity cost and actual charges, like property taxes.
In other words, this approach is not for the total real estate investing beginner!
Airbnb and Other Vacation Sublets
As anyone who's taken a vacation in the past five years knows, hotels are so last century.
Nowadays, it's all about the intimacy, convenience, and relative affordability of peer-to-peer short-term rental accommodations, like the ones available on Airbnb.
If the home you buy has a spare bedroom — or better yet, an outbuilding or separate in-law quarters — you can use that space to turn a tidy profit.
Just be sure you look into the regulations in your area first. Some cities have enacted a short-term rental permit or licensing program in order to ensure enough housing remains available for permanent residents.
As you can see, there are many ways to get started in real estate investing, even if you don't have the cash to buy a rental property outright.
And who knows? If you play your cards right, the returns you make may just put you in mogul territory — or at least keep a roof over your head.
Jamie Cattanach's work has been featured at Fodor's, Yahoo, SELF, The Huffington Post, The Motley Fool, Roads & Kingdoms and other outlets. Learn more at www.jamiecattanach.com.
This was originally published on The Penny Hoarder, which helps millions of readers worldwide earn and save money by sharing unique job opportunities, personal stories, freebies and more. The Inc. 5000 ranked The Penny Hoarder as the fastest-growing private media company in the U.S. in 2017.
"Welcome to the show where everything's made up and the points don't matter," Drew Carey was famous for saying at the introduction of the hit improv comedy series, Who's Line is it, Anyway? Lately, I've thought that this same phrase could apply to the that niche-within-a-niche in the boardgame market: complex Eurogames. Afterall, the exotic themes often have much less to do with the mechanics than simply to add a little color to the graphic presentation, and the points...well, there's so many of them to be had, that I can often hear Carey's voice in the back of my head each turn, exclaiming with a smile, "A thousand points for everyone!"
In the comment section of a review of prolific game designer Stefan Feld's newest gamer's game, Bora Bora, Ben McJunkin of the Opioniated Gamers used the term "Point Salad" to describe what has become a popular scoring mechanism in these complex games: "One source of my disagreement with Feld's designs is the excessive use of granular and contingent points scoring. In other corners of the interwebz, I have regularly advocated for games to provide clearer feedback to players through points allocations. Ideally, good play would produce points, average play would not, and bad play would lose points. In most of Feld's games, I find it too easy to get complacent with suboptimal moves, since even bad choices result in the game effectively shouting, "Good job! Here, take another handful of points." While those who enjoy and excel at Feldian designs can rightly make the point that part of the game's skill comes in puzzling out the difference between "a handful of points" and "the biggest handful of points," I generally prefer games with clearer (and fewer) objectives, such that the focus is on the interplayer fight to achieve them."
Why are "point salads" popular in recent games? For the gamer, it may be psychological effect of being rewarded at every turn. As many of these games are so-called "engine-building" games, it is encouraging to see those engines producing something of value. Yes, there are any number of resource conversions at work, but ultimately, the goal is to convert these into victory points as efficiently as possible.
From a game design perspective, the Point Salad offers several benefits:
Tying the Game's Mechanics to it's Theme
Games are abstractions of reality, but a Point Salad game can reflect real-life rewards without the overwhelming complexity of a simulation. Agricola is an example of a game that rewards players in every area for reasons of thematic integrity.
Balancing the Game In Germany, game balance is a priority. And for complex games that offer multiple paths to victory, balancing the various elements and strategic possibilities requires the most time and effort from the designer and developer. The Point Salad approach offers a relatively easy way of doing this. With so many points awarded for each possibility, the numbers can be quickly and simply adjusted when imbalances are discovered. Is this the "easy way out" of the problem, however, and is there a better solution?
Settlers of Catan, for example, gave us the very elegant "first player to 10 points wins." Even Puerto Rico gave us some complex, interweaving systems while still only rewarding victory points for shipping and buildings.
Since then, game designers have moved away from this approach to Point Salad scoring, and I'm not sure our designs are better for it. Friend Peer Sylvester and I have talked about getting away from that type of game, but it wasn't until recently that I realized I was still depending on this approach with one of my new designs. Now, after receiving criticism much like that doled out by McJunkin above, I'm overhauling the prototype in order to provide the players with much clearer goals and mechanics that allow them to better measure their progress relative to their opponents. These were the standards set by the German games of the 90's and early part of the last decade.
You might say I'm tossing the Point Salad in favor of the "Meat and Potatoes" of German game design.
