> “It’s less about making money off that inventory, at least initially, and more about who can get the most inventory the fastest.”

> iBuyers have recently shifted “to a free-for-all, acquire at any cost strategy.” At present, both Opendoor and Zillow’s homes division are losing money in the process.

> “For some families, it may be difficult to compete, when they are trying to buy a house, with a company like that,” Quercia said, referring to iBuyers. “So if this was a widespread practice in some neighborhoods, it may create some concerns about a lot of the housing stock being owned by investors from outside of the community as opposed to households and residents.”

> The company, which is reportedly searching out a new $2 billion revolving credit facility, also announced this week that it is now willing to purchase the majority of homes in every one of its current markets.

> That would be welcome news for people like Alex Villacorta, the co-founder and chief data officer of ResiShares, an investment management company focused on residential real estate. “If they can get enough inventory flow, they’ll end up being a marketplace for investors,” said Villacorta. “We would be more than happy to buy in bulk off of them.”

I understand all of that, but an investment company owning a property does not mean that individual homeowners can't own them. There's a leap in logic here where its assumed any company owning residential real estate = everyone is forever a rentier. That's a separate claim worth backing with some evidence (e.g. investment companies buying properties -> increased home prices across geographies -> no one can afford a home), which I haven't seen and the article doesn't provide