upvote
You are missing the biggest benefit of a self storage business - the appreciation of the underlying real estate. When you dig into the financials of the major self storage businesses you'll see they are essentially REITs that have better cashflow. They can pick an up-and-coming area, do a minimal build-out with low annual overhead, and then down the road when the facility would be needing overhauls and maintenance the underlying property has typically appreciated so much that it dwarfs all other associated revenue streams and makes sense to sell and raze the existing structure. Great business model if you have a long enough timeline.

This is also why some startups trying to revolutionize the self storage model had extreme headwinds - if you are renting the underlying properties and trying to make the storage business profitable you are at an extreme disadvantage to the larger players who can subsidize operating costs with portfolio appreciation.

reply
This same concept is also true of McDonalds historically - they own the land, lease it to franchisees, and realize the appreciation themselves. McDonalds are fairly economically valuable, so the capital gains by the time they're cleared and resold as development often dwarfs the value of the franchise fees.
reply
The thing is, they rarely sell the properties. At least from what I've seen. It's all unrealized appreciated value.
reply
Cashflow from renting to a franchisee must be fantastic. You pick the locations and the decor. If the business does well you prosper, but if the business does poorly you're insulated from the downside, the rent is due either way! If the franchisee can't hack it you repossess the building and rent it to some other suc^H^H^Hfranchisee.
reply
McDonald's is invested in franchisee's success, it wouldn't be a great business otherwise.
reply
It's actually hilarious sometimes. The business models that generate most scorn and incredulity on HN are the straightforward ones. They convert labor pretty much directly to a very basic product with a clear demand by society, that can't possibly be profitable, are we sure it's not actually a front for Real Estate or AI or Tax Evasion?
reply
I'm sure real estate is the primary business model of McDonald's but franchisees wouldn't be paying the rent and fees if the restaurant model itself wasn't very profitable.

Most restaurants in Europe generate an average of 250k in net cash flow per average restaurant, that's few years of work before ROI.

reply
They don't have to ever sell the properties. Property can be assessed by a third party and then function as collateral against a low-interest loan, which is real money.

Not that I think McDonald's will ever really find themselves in a pinch, but if they did, they would additionally be able to liquidate selected properties for cash. When you are rich enough, the promise of having money in the future is just as good as actually having money. It doesn't work like that for most of us, but that's the nature of risk assessment in finance.

reply
Rent is the realization of value appreciation - value is just the NPV of future rents
reply
Still looks good enough on financial statements if you’re ig enough to care about them, and it makes for great collateral in the process of buying the next one.
reply
As someone once put it: "McDonald's is a real estate company with a hamburger hobby"
reply
Reminds me of the similar one about Harvard with a hedge fund and a little school.
reply
Or quite a few religious organizations.

The whole reason why the Catholic Church doesn't allow priests to be married anymore was because it used to be that the individual churches were mostly the property of the priest, and would be passed down generationally (with some restrictions). The church phased in the ban on marriage so that over time, the churches would all in up in the estate of a priest with no heirs, where they'd become the property more formally of the Catholic Church proper. Today the Catholic Church is the single largest landowner in the world, with about 170 million acres.

More recent religious organizations have taken note of that, with LDS owning about 2.4M acres.

reply
Your comment dragged me into a rabbit hole, which is always a welcome surprise.

From my readings, one can always debate whether this reason for celibacy is whole or not (of course, more holy reasons were given, like purity of the ritual among others), but avoiding inheritance from father to sons was certainly a big factor. By barring heirs from the equation, it solved the whole dispute over inheritance. Yet, when it comes to clerical office and priesthood, "property" is not quite right, since it's mostly about usufruct and benefices, moreso. Which can be significant assets, that goes without saying, hence the Church did everything it could, for holy and not-so-holy-reasons, that traditional generational transmission does not apply. No next generation, no problem.

Quite importantly to the Roman Catholic Church, they wanted to avoid dynasties of priests that would grow in importance and out of their control, so they did whatever they could (ban marriage and fatherhood) so that a mis-aligned priest would only be a temporary nuisance to the Institution.

A lot went into this short burst of investigation, like the fact that early Churches were private property of land-owners, building churches for indulgences and power, reinforcing their ties with the Church, and I may dig deeper. Thanks for your comment again, if you have some references you recommend, I'd appreciate you share them!

reply
The original LLM agents
reply
I don't understand what you mean. Do you mean I or the GP used LLMs?

If you mean I did, yes, I have, to begin with, to get an overview and links. But to do any of the reading or to write my comment? No. What's wrong with that?

reply
That does not sound correct. Priests in Eastern rite Catholic churches get married, but they do not own the land in which their parish chirch stands and they do not pass that land on to their children. Note that the Catholic Church itself does not own that land, either. As I understand it, in most cases the parish land is owned by a Catholic episcopal See or eparchia, as in Latin rite Catholic Churches, in which the diocese owns the land.
reply
Duke: A healthcare system with a little University.
reply
Same is also true of DJT's various casino gambits. Pilloried in the media but rather sound (though high risk) from a land speculation perspective.
reply
You're saying that bankrupting a casino was actually 4D chess? Ok, buddy, whatever you say.
reply
Did I say that? Since they failed, they were obviously bad business. But they were a rational thing to attempt to do - taking on a massive loan to speculate on land and using a (potentially) high cashflow, quick to setup, easy to market business to offset the high initial interest rates. i.e. the same thing being discussed in this thread
reply
FWIW “Gambit” without elaboration strongly invokes the “the bankrupcies were on purpose” to me, so, did you say it? Strictly no, but it was very suggestive.
reply
Eh. I wanted to be provocative because I've heard a lot of educated but economically naive people assume 'highly leveraged hotel-casino project' is dumb a priori, even though it's (an example of a) a sensible and common business strategy available to the wealthy. I didn't mean to imply bankruptcy was intentional though.

As to whether Trump did this better or worse than others, I have no idea as I haven't studied it but would assume the latter given the outcome.

A certainty though - plenty of undeserving people you would consider contemptible have successfully played this hand many a time. Yet more reasons to tax land

reply
A rational thing for a competent person to attempt. Given the theoretical structural advantages of the idea, the 6 failures are even more embarrassing than failing at something that was actually a bad idea.
reply
Bankruptcy is great actually, you don't have to pay the money you owe but if you play your cards right you can still keep the benefits.
reply
Well it's not like it didn't work out very well for Trump. Idk if it's 4D Chess but a huge part of the expense that lead to bankruptcy was licencing of the Trump brand. Can't pay all the other vendors because we first had to pay to license the name. OK, bankruptcy.
reply
That's the answer, it's a way to squat on land. Another way I know of is a golf course. It's more maintenance but it's a way to generate some cash to offset property taxes and then wait for a decade or two and sell.
reply
I had an acquaintance who had a couple of driving ranges for golf for that exact purpose. He said it kept the property taxes lower than if he had built nothing on them. His only goal was to be break-even until he sold.
reply
Yeah, came here to post something similar. I used to hang around in real estate circles, and two businesses come up often: Self storage and car wash. These are two things people just can't get enough of.

(Car wash usage doesn't go down even during a recession, apparently).

reply
I personally don't get car washes. I just wait for it to rain. Then free car wash...
reply
There's aesthetic reasons (I'm proud of my car, I like it to look nice), and practical reasons (Leaving mud, grit, salt etc, will wear and corrode my car faster).

Where I live, summer rain doesn't really clean the car (if that's what you care about), and in the winter you are shortening your cars life by years if you don't try and get the salt off regularly.

reply
When I bought my 8 year old car, it was from the Midwest and the mechanic I asked to check it out said "Don't buy - it's got a good amount of rust because of the salt they use". I asked whether it means the car is less safe. He said "No, just more repairs and potentially costlier repairs. I said "Over the remaining life of the car, how much extra would it cost?" In today's dollars, the answer was $2000.

I bought the car. It easily lasted another 7 years before it died in a collision.

My car prior was a purely Midwest car, and I rarely washed it. It happily lasted 16 years. I passed it on to someone else, and he used it for a few more years.

I suspect the fear is overblown.

reply
The fear may be outdated.

I'm 62, and grew up near Detroit. I remember cars developing major rust holes after just a few years. The rusting also affected the inside of the engine compartment, and it did make repairs more difficult. There was an industry of aftermarket rustproofing shops, that were a scam. Every teenager with a car (which was still rare) learned how to patch rust holes with Bondo.

My first car, the frame rusted out and had to be welded back together.

Toyota and Honda put a stop to that. They did a number of things: Better steel alloys, better coatings, painting the bodywork before it could start rusting, eliminating places in the body where water could accumulate, etc.

Today, you rarely see totally rusted out cars on the road.

reply
The bodies are better, but I can assure you, the frames and suspension parts are not. They still rust out here in the salt belt after 10-15 years, depending on the brand and how often you drive them. If Michigan instituted mandatory annual car inspections, it would take about half the (still working, not unsafe) cars off the road.
reply
I've never had a frame go bad that soon. Most of those are recalls where they replace the frame
reply
Yeah my wife and I inherited her parents' Highlander from Boston when they moved back to their home country. The drive shaft literally fell out on the road because the brackets holding it on rusted out. Was lucky I had enough momentum to pull over.
reply
The old days the cars would rust and take the frame with it (I've literally had them get so bad they basically folded up) - modern vehicles will stay pretty darn decent until the first time the paint gets broken, then it'll begin - but the unibody usually lasts quite a long time.
reply
No, I watch video of cars coming into the shop and the models from the Midwest are usually in pretty rough shape due to all the corrosion from the salt on the roads. And brand doesn't seem to matter.
reply
Not disagreeing with you. That's exactly what my mechanic saw as well which is why he warned me.

But it really didn't make a difference to the longevity of the car. Sure, occasionally a repair was a tad more expensive, but that's it.

reply
I live in New York, which is heavy handed with salt. Paints and alloys are better, but there’s basically a 250k and about 10 year lifespan for a car that lives upstate.

The frame, exhaust and suspension generally get corroded and start to fail. You see a lot of 200k Civics and Accords, but few 250k.

You really notice it when traveling to California. Last time I was in SFO with my son, he counted 78 Porsche 911s and about 100 “old” (80s or older) cars on the roads.

reply
I've always lived in the midwest. Every car I've ever owned has been a car from the midwest, and has been driven in the midwest.

The salt from the road is driven by car tires into a briny mist that coats everything. It blocks vision through windows. It accumulates in chunks that can be kicked (like mud also can, except corrosive). It wicks its way into tiny crevices and betwixt layers and infects every part of the car that can be infected, and once there it rots everything that it can rot.

And I don't mean just the bodywork; that part has been getting better with improved processes and paint.

But stamped control arms often rust away while the ball joints and bushings are still in good form. Electrical connections rot. Frames and frame-like components often have scaly holes in them. Every exposed engine part corrodes; uncoated steel turns black, red, or brown; galvanized and aluminum parts turn white and kind of fuzzy (and stuck). Our junkyards are full of rusted-out hulks of cars with drivetrains that still work properly, even if they're ugly.

Fixing things when they break is tedious and time-consuming, and the most-sane approach to any repair on a car that's more than a few years old is to go into it with an expectation everything that doesn't crumble from rust is instead frozen with rust.

The work itself unilaterally causes a person a learn new facets of their verbal and mechanical vocabulary that they never even knew possible, and is arduous in ways that would test the emotional stamina of a Buddhist monk.

With enough cleaning and care (and just rinsing things off by driving in the rain), a car that is from the midwest can be largely saved. Getting rid of all of the salt slows the process down very dramatically.

But a car that is regularly driven in the midwestern winter is in the midst of a fairly quick process of being returned to the earth.

It's just a fact that is plain and that we live with every day. We do work to prevent it; on a warm-ish day in January, cars will line up around the block to get into a car wash and have a chance to dry out before ice freezes every orifice closed.

But it's not fear, I don't think. Just as we accept the sun coming up every day and disappearing over the opposite horizon every night, we accept the rot as something that will inevitably consume the most expensive machine that we own and that this will happen on a schedule that we play very little part in controlling.

reply
Watch the channel Auto Parts City on YouTube, I assure you it is not overblown. It's a junkyard owner. A ton of cars come through there that run fine and could otherwise be very serviceable, but the frame/body are crumbling from rust, so they have to be crushed. We're talking cars that are 10 years old. And yes, it even includes Toyotas and Hondas. (In fact they're more likely to end up crushed for that reason than another car is, since a Nissan or Hyundai's transmission and engine won't last long enough for rust to really end its life.)

From a certain perspective, maybe some people don't care if they would be getting rid of the car in like 5 years, but if you do want to keep a car 15 years and you live in "salt country" I would strongly suggest doing something about the salt regularly.

reply
Selection bias. Cars that were not treated for salt, and didn't die, didn't end up in the junkyard for stories to be told.

My first car spent its first 15 years in the Midwest. No garage. Very irregular car washes (perhaps once a year when I owned it). It lasted about 20 years total. When I lived there, I didn't know anyone who had to give up a car due to rust. There definitely was rust, but not something that caused the car to break down.

reply
Coincidently I was thinking about car wash just few days back, One was bought in 2014, never car washed seems fine so far. Another was bought in 2022 again no wash so far and no plan to.

I used to think everyone does it, I will do at some point but that point never came. Inside we vacuum and wipe every few months. Washed mats once in an year or so but car body wash rain takes care of it.

reply
I used to wash my car once a year, then I just ran out of time ;)
reply
I saw rusted out cars and trucks all over the place when I visited northern Minnesota and the UP of Michigan last year. Even late-model cars that couldn't have been more than 5-10 years old had rusted out rocker panels.
reply
Yeah, those are good points I hadn't really thought of much. Thanks! I guess it's less of a priority for me because I bought my car for $1000 and it came with Michigan rust already. Lol.
reply
deleted
reply
I rarely wash as well. But we're in a minority in US society.
reply
Or a garden hose, bucket of soapy water, and a sponge. At least if you have a house with a garden hose. Many apartment complexes offer the amenity of an area for washing cars though.
reply
Most Canadian cities prohibit washing anything (car, bike, etc) outside with soap unless you're capturing the runoff. Even biodegradable soaps.

Car wash is the only legal way to use soap, for better or worse.

reply
> unless you're capturing the runoff

And doing what with it, exactly?

reply
Not sure if it's the same in Canada, but where I am from the problem is the oil (lubricant and fuel) from the car and at car washes the runoff gets treated by letting it go through an oil trap.

The trapped oil gets disposed of separately, the treated oil-free water goes to the sewer.

reply
Hell if I know.

AFAIK the regulations were put into place to prevent untreated water from going into storm drains and into the water system, so presumably the cities are fine if you pour it down into the bathtub drain and let it go to the waste water treatment plants.

reply
I appreciate the sentiment, but is the gunk on the car not the gunk that would have washed down the drains in the first place? Clearly there are plenty of nasty cleaning agents, but one supposes that safe ones might be used (I actually spent a while considering exactly this, and it's possible but not super easy getting an environmentally friendly car cleaner). I guess the issue is it's hard to tell from mere drive-by observation what cleaner is being used.
reply
You can allow the liquid to evaporate off in an evaporation pond, or combine it with an absorbent gel. Then the solids can be put in trash.
reply
I assume no one actually does this when washing their car.
reply
Car washes are an order of magnitude more water efficient (enforced by state agencies) than individual home car washing.
reply
Yeah that could be a concern depending where you live. Where I live, water is cheap and abundant. And I've never measured, but I would guess I use maybe 10 gallons to wash a car. 2 gallons in the bucket, and just a light wetting followed by soapy sponge and then a rinse, using a nozzle to create a high velocity spray. The water doesn't run at all unless I'm spraying it on the car.
reply
Water is cheap and abundant where I live, too. If we have a problem with water in any normal year, it is usually that we have to deal with a surplus of it. (We put drainage tiles under our farm fields to get rid of excess water and generally don't even bother with irrigation systems at all.)

But car washes are interesting systems and one of the things that makes them interesting is that the water they use is (often) recycled. The same water gets reclaimed and re-used to wash cars over and over again.

I didn't look very deep at all, but one car wash chain suggests[1] a reclamation rate of 70%. Not perfect, but way better than 0.

[1]: https://www.tsunamiexpress.com/our-washes/

reply
You can probably match that efficiency at home by using an electric pressure washer. Mine does 1.2 GPM, which means an entire car wash is only a few gallons.
reply
Yes. In the same way that dishwashers are an order of magnitude more water-efficient than washing by hand. (But consume a kilowatt of electricity heating the water and running the pump, which is the part that everyone always leaves out.)
reply
You heat the water when you wash dishes by hand too, don't you? It's not very hygenic to do dishes with just cold water.

Given that by hand you use much more hot water than the dishwasher would, you're using more electricity (or gas). Since a little pump doesn't use much at all, it's mainly just the drying heat that matters. Though nobody is forced to use the drying cycle - if one enjoys drying dishes by hand, they can still use the dishwasher to do the washing.

reply
In my house you don't heat the water but it's been sitting in a metal water tank at equitorial latitude for hours so is generally quite warm for evening dishes.

Is it safe? Not for a restaurant where the temps need to get to parasite killing temps to pass muster.. but if I had to guess, the odds of getting killed by a bad-tempered cow outweigh it by 10x.

reply
You're assuming an absence of solar hot water heaters - the world isn't homogenous.

eg. Our household conserves water (we track every litre we bring up to the tanks and filter) and we don't have a dishwasher - hot water is heated by the sun and run-off goes to the grey water tank for the garden.

reply
When my water heating was electric, switching to a dishwasher consistently led to lower electric bills compared to a year prior (confirmed for 12 whole months).

You save water and electricity.

reply
But can you put dishes with food on them in the dish washer?
reply
Yes.
reply
That's surprising. I once tried an automated car wash just to see what all the hullabaloo was about and I think the rain actually does a better job. Worst $5 I've ever spent...
reply
I live next to a college. The Sororities will hold car washes. Of course, they ask us to get out of the car first, so that Cheerleading movie w/ Kristen Dundst lied. :-)
reply
Rain tends to just move the dirt around, at least where I am.
reply
Where do you live? I live in the Midwest (SE MI) and when there's rain it tends to be medium-to-heavy rain and with wind so sideways.
reply
Other continent :)

You ever park under trees?

reply
I think I may have an autistic affinity for washing machines, but I would LOVE to own a laundromat. I feel like this would fit into the self storage/ car wash category.
reply
> I would LOVE to own a laundromat.

My (late) kid brother did that for a number of years. Big time sink and PITA.

reply
too many moving parts lol
reply
There's a guy Investment Joy on YouTube who you would probably enjoy watching, then. Just a pretty normal guy who runs a few small businesses. I think he has at least one car wash and a laundromat among other things. He talks about the various costs and problems, too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nikXsAW12Wo

reply
Oh actually, yes - that comes up once in a while as well.
reply
Ha, I watched some guy on Youtube who bought a carwash. It's seems like a decent way to basically make some money with not a ton of work. Plus, you can get a lot of money as cash too, makes it easy to not report as income, which I bet a lot of their owners do.
reply
Or conversely, if you have cash income you need to launder…
reply
Land value tax!
reply
Or, you jack up prices to pay for the renovations. Self storage out in the middle of nowhere is cheap, but self storage in a urban location that's easily accessible is not.
reply
Both are correct. The decision will come down to what the cash flow and demand actual is and what they expect the future land to be worth. Sometimes you just let it go down to a low tier of maintenance, avoid all R&M and ride it out until you’re ready to cash in. The appreciation is collateral for future developments to so the model scales well.

As long as home ownership declines, storage facilities will continue to flourish. There may be a blip when all the boomer downsizing demand evaporates as their kids will trash the junk.

reply
$80/month that becomes $120/month and then $200/month within a year or two, and they mail you a postcard to tell you about it. I guess that's another nice perk of the business.
reply
This literally just happened to me for a storage unit we got to store a bunch of baby stuff while deciding if we’re going to have another kid.

Started at $87/month for a 5x10 unit. Plenty of space, and I added a six-foot-tall shelving unit ($50 from Home Depot) to keep it organized and access stuff when needed.

We’ve had it for maybe 18 months now, and I just realized it’s $204/month for the last 6 months.

It’s at the top of my list to eliminate this storage unit within the next few months.

We also had a 12 month personal limit on how long we’d keep it, but life happens.

reply
The other perk is they charge “mandatory” insurance fees. It is easy to opt out if you prove you have insurance but at least the facility I am using makes it seem like it is hard.
reply
They will also "accidentally" re-add the insurance fees. I had a storage unit for about a year while sorting through my brother's estate, and without fail every 3 months the insurance fee would get added back on. I was so glad when I was able to cancel that lease, it was maddening to have to keep calling about the same issue.
reply
My son's college did the same thing. Every term, the billing for tuition and fees would include (a very expensive) fee for heath insurance. I would have to declare again that he was covered on my plan as a dependent and he didn't need the school's plan.

I'm convinced they do this because the kids using student loans aren't paying attention.

reply
There are more self-storage facilities than there are Starbucks, Subways and McDonalds -- combined.

Read that again.

Wendover productions has a great video on the phenomena of self-storage and the economics around this: https://youtu.be/uEVv8SOJ6Is

reply
I know someone in the biz, so two other ways people are making money:

1) Buying land and getting it rezoned for storage and then selling it on -- it's getting harder to get permits to build storage as people get sick of them, so there is a whole economy in knowing how and where to build them and only dealing with the paperwork.

2) Storage unit construction is a huge business now.

Sell the shovels in the gold rush etc.

reply
I used to work at a company that was the industry leader in business management software for storage facility owners. I don't remember exact numbers but a lot of facilities are mom & pop type operations where people basically invested in the business as a retirement plan. It's a surprisingly stable and profitable industry. Economy good? People buy too much crap and want to store it. Economy bad? People have to move and downsize their housing and need to store stuff. Large incentive for tenants to avoid delinquency because they risk their stuff being auctioned off.
reply
You're on the nose. My parent passed shortly after I went to University. It was tough and much easier to put all of her belongings in storage for four years, then it was dealing with it then and there while renting and in between jobs.
reply
I thought the article was predominantly about supply side. There are more quotes from providers than consumers. The article mentions every point you’ve made. You’ve summarized the article bang on.
reply
Suspect it’s far more than $80/month - I was paying that much for a small unit about 30 years ago! (In a LCOL area too!)
reply
I paid around that for a 5x10 unit in a medium sized midwestern city for a year during covid when I worked fully remote and moved back to my parents' house for a year.
reply
Love to see some numbers on what starting up a self-storage runs.
reply
I disagree with the last point -- it's a pain to gather a bunch of things up, put them in vehicles (or rent a truck), find a storage facility that isn't full, rent the unit, haul your things over to the unit.. all the while ignoring that you're putting off whatever culling and disposal ceremony you should actually be engaging in.

My local town gives you two free visits to the garbage transfer station per year. Choosing storage over that seems harder.

reply
It is difficult for people to throw things away.

Many things invoke "but this is a perfectly good..." I had a LaserJet monochrome printer. I knew I would never use it because I now have a color model, and if the color one broke I would replace it immediately. "But this is a perfectly good printer." It sat for a few years on a shelf before I finally tossed it. Resale nets too little to be worthwhile.

Other things represent work. This is old files in the office. My workplace was full of file cabinets with drawers of papers. It was decades of accumulated knowledge. No one would ever read them or use them. But throwing them away seemed disrespectful of all the work that went into those papers. For these things, I think of my daughter's math homework. It is extremely valuable and lots of work went into it, and there is zero reason to retain it the instant it comes home.

Other things represent memories. They embody a long friend or lost relative, or a vacation, or an occasion, or a feeling they caused when worn, used, etc. Discarding it seems to disrespect the memory. I try to keep these things to a minimum - keep representative samples, and digitize to the extent possible.

This is why discarding things is hard. I don't want storage space and have none, but I completely understand why people would rather shove apparently useless things into a storage locker. It's easier to pay to store it than to discard it. I go a step farther and say that it's worth it for folks to pay to store these things. It's worth $80/month or whatever it costs to have that stuff sitting in a storage box, even if they know they will never ever use or even look at them.

reply
facebook marketplace for $10 or $20 is magic. People don't like free as much as they like paying $10 or $20 for a $50 item
reply
A nominal fee convinces people they're getting a bargain. "Free" feels like you're driving to someone's house to pick up their trash.
reply
Very well said, I often feel the same way.

About memories - throwing away the associated item often feels like admitting that you can't go back to the moment represented by the item. It's hard to face that small grief so it's easier to keep it there.

reply
> My local town gives you two free visits to the garbage transfer station per year.

Where I live in Norway the recycling station is open three days a week and I can take stuff there free as often as I like up to 2 000 kg of stuff per year.

It has never occurred to me that there would be a limit on the number of visits. Or have I misunderstood?

reply
Recycling dropoff is normally free in North America. Waste that cannot be recycled is typically charged by weight for the cost of disposal at waste facilities. You can visit either as often as you like, but will pay to have your garbage disposed of. The GP lives in a place where you do not have to pay for non-recyclable waste the first two times you visit per year. This is normally done to encourage people with a large volume of waste from a single cleanup to dispose of waste properly (dumping on vacant land is a big problem in many parts of NA).
reply
Recycling drop-off is not free for me, and neither is having recycling picked up at the house. If I need to drop stuff off at the dump, it's a flat fee per drop-off with a limit of one trailer load per drop-off. Burn barrels are also illegal in Maricopa County, so Amazon boxes just go in the trash.
reply
Where I live (America, but waste processing is all handled at the local level and policies differ), the landfill has a "resident convenience center" with a bunch of dropoff stations for various types of stuff, along with a big ledge you can toss things over to be sent to the landfill. When you arrive, and attendent will ask and/or look at what you have and tell you where to put it. Sometimes the answer is "you can't dump that for free. Go to the transfer station and pay by the pound".

In theory, there is also an annual wait limit to free dumps, but they can't actually enforce it.

reply
US here. where I am: Recycling is free, hazardous waste is open a few days a month (also free), appliances are free, and rubbish is measured by weight (they weigh your vehicle on the way in and out). They pay you to take metal.
reply
Without any fee beyond the required annual solid waste bill, my municipality will let me set out up to 20 (!) bags of trash per week with up to 50 lb (!) in them every week. I can throw out two tons of trash per month without having to haul anything anywhere or pay any extra fees.

Clearly this is madness, but it does make it a lot easier to throw shit out than put it in a storage unit.

reply
Trust me, given how many people just accumulate trash because it's expensive, that's an absolutely sane and excellent policy. As a society, we want people to use trash disposal, because the alternative is expensive, painful, and disgusting.
reply
You can literally tell which municipalities in my state have been hoodwinked by the Karens into adopting "pay as you throw". They're the ones where there's trash everywhere.

It's like these people can't think two steps ahead (I'd go so far as to say that's the defining feature of regulatory policy in this state). You just gave people a financial incentive to litter and dump.

reply
Which state so I can avoid it?
reply
deleted
reply
>hazardous waste is open a few days a month

Are you serious? Here in NH it's either once or twice a year. I call it "The real Father's Day" and plan to have a couple of podcasts or similar queued up for the wait in line.

reply
> Here in NH it's either once or twice a year

Good god! Why on earth would you make it difficult to dispose of hazardous waste safely?

Here in Blighty, the local tip (sorry 'recycling centre') is open throughout the week and accepts everything from used engine oil and battery acid to asbestos. Granted some of the smaller tips might not have such facilities, but they will direct you to one that will.

All free of charge for non-commercial users. (Business will have their own regulated arrangements for hazardous goods).

reply
In Copenhagen (and I think it's similar in most of Denmark) there's a fireproof cupboard in the basement of my apartment building for hazardous waste. Houses have a small red box they can leave out if they have something.

Making hazardous waste disposal inconvenient seems like a good way to have it end up in the normal waste stream.

https://affald.kk.dk/affaldsfraktion/saadan-sorterer-du-farl...

reply
My theory is self storage is actually in competition with getting a bigger house.

If your family is seriously considering moving to a bigger house, and that move is going to cost you $20,000 that makes renting a storage unit for $1000/year sound like a great deal.

reply
> My theory is self storage is actually in competition with getting a bigger house.

Obviously true. If one had a house with space for posessions, there would be no need for storage. As houses become ever smaller (for a given $/sqft) external self-storage becomes the only affordable way to gain some space.

My parents were poor but back ~70 years ago it was still achievable for a lower income family to buy a house with some space. As an engineer in Silicon Valley, the largest house I can afford is barely twice the square footage of my childhood bedroom. In such a tiny house we fit 3 people, all with hobbies and equipment, child has toys, etc. A house with enough space would be another million at the very least. So that's impossible.

So compared to that, a couple hundred a month for self-storage is a bargain. I hate it, would rather have the equity in a larger property but it is impossible to afford.

So yes, that's why storage facilities have such a boom. Housing by $/sqft is impossibly expensive.

reply
Allowing people to put off the disposal ceremony is the primary value of the service!
reply
deleted
reply
Why assume that disposal is warranted? Sometimes, people actually reuse what they store. Also, it's better to donate than to dispose.
reply
Sure.. donation is easy, doesn't require a storage unit.

When I've had storage units and spent time there, and saw open doors and what people had in theirs, I stand by my take.

The whole point of the article posted above was that it's a bit weird how numerous and prevalent self-storage has gotten in the US.

reply
Donation isn't that easy if one has to find someone who actually desires each item. It requires a lot of online posts, communication, and overall effort, but this ensures that each item finds a new home that's right for it.
reply
>Also, it's better to donate than to dispose

Aka, trash by proxy.

Best to look up what people actually need. There is a lot of this junk we collect that just gets junked by the donation groups turning into a cost center.

reply
Donating to donation groups isn't a great donation. It's better to catalog and post each item, communicate with people who want it, and thereby find it a new home that's right for it. Granted, this is not possible for all items, especially never for clothing.
reply
Yes, and every time this narrative comes up we seem to conveniently ignore that this is highly correlated with renting instead of buying a home and people of all ages enjoying frequent travel.

If you move often enough within a small radius, you will highly value your storage unit. It's not necessarily just a place for junk. Many people rotate their things when their apartment lease is up or even seasonally. If you live near water, you might even store a boat. Many facilities also offer RV storage. Personally, when I had roommates I would keep my most important stuff in there instead of at home.

The attacks against storage units are engagement bait for nerds about a non-story.

reply
I'm glad you have free visits to the dump for it. I've never lived anywhere where I wouldn't have to also pay to get my trash hauled away, so it's a big pain with old mattresses or furniture honestly.
reply
You're hauling the stuff regardless.

Dealing with renting a storage unit vs deciding to throw away your Pokemon cards feels like kind of a wash.

reply
Are you infinitely wealthy? Storage units are a slow leak on finances, just like uncanceled subscriptions and mobile phone plan features.
reply
Rebuying decorations every year is also a leak on finances. Rebuying a bunch of camping gear (more than I can comfortably store in my home) is also a leak on finances.

It's far cheaper to use a storage unit for a lot of this stuff I do routinely use than buying and selling a house just to get more storage space at home.

I'm not blind to the fact not everyone just stores junk they never use. I'm certain there's a percentage of stuff in mine that is probably better off sold or trashed. But until we stop changing decorations for the different seasons, stop a number of hobbies with bulky stuff, or move to a giant mansion I just don't have the space and could use a few more square feet of pure storage space.

reply
The answer is pretty simple: reduce your possessions to the space you can fill for free.
reply
So give up on hobbies and everything occasional that requires some equipment since they can’t keep it at home, so basically give up on things that make life worth living to a lot of people. Yeah nah.
reply
So, own nothing.

Every square footage of every home costs $$$ to keep in your possession. I pay a mortgage. I pay insurance. I pay taxes. I pay maintenance costs. There were acquisition costs in the purchase of it, and there will be acquisition costs wherever I go next. Not one square inch of my home is "free".

Suddenly that simple answer isn't so simple when actually confronted with reality, unless you're willing to be homeless and just carry your possessions in your hands.

reply
i think they are suggesting to rethink the need for things like seasonal decorations if you are forced to pay a life long recurring fee for the privilege.
reply
> if you are forced to pay a life long recurring fee for the privilege.

I have to regardless of a storage unit or in a closet in my house. That closet in my home and that shelf in my garage isn't free either.

So then it's just a question of owning anything at all or nothing, because it all has a life long recurring fee for the privilege of continuing to own it. And yes, my family finds value in decorating for holidays as a part of celebrating, remembering, and keeping traditions alive.

Sometimes people don't just want to live in the same IKEA box 365 days a year.

reply
Who tf is breaking the bank on subscriptions and phone bills?

Are all these comments like yours coming from college students or what? If anything else, a storage unit is one of the most valuable things to pay for if you just moved out on your own.

reply
No, I'm not, and I've also never rented a storage unit.

It seems hard to imagine the sums involved becoming comparable to other amounts of money lit on fire to avoid fights with family though (i.e. home renovation, travel).

reply
Interesting comparison and one I didn't consider. Thanks for the insight!
reply
You are missing one other issue: it seems easier than it really is. There are only so many people who would use self storage. You see a full self storage place in town and thing you can get a share if you just build one. What you don't understand is demand is not elastic: if you build a second site in town you go from 100 units with 90 used (a good usage rate), do 200 units in town but still only 90 used.
reply
Eventually price crashes far enough below retail that commercial users start filling out a lot of the space because the cost per square foot is lower than their own space.

Like you shove your winter PPE, your emergency stash of spare parts for process equipment, etc, etc, in some self storage lockers and get the same job done using less square footage with extensive compliance burden (or get more job done using same square footage).

reply
I live near some storage facilities, and a significant number of them are rented by businesses.

Go to one of theses facilities at 7 am, and you will almost always see a few contractors packing the truck with whatever they need for the day.

reply
[dead]
reply
Demand is outpacing supply, so new supply is serving that unmet demand, not creating it.
reply
This is Jevon's paradox - as you make the supply better and more efficient to use, people will demand more of it.
reply
That assumes the market is saturated, and there's nothing you could do to convince a non-customer to become a customer.
reply