Are We Doing Lease Renewals Backwards?
A strong renewal outcome often saves more net revenue than a brand-new lease creates.
The leasing paradox: saving more while spending less. Is this just one of those, “Because we’ve always done it that way” practices?
In multifamily, it’s common to see higher bonuses or commissions paid for new leases than for resident renewals. That structure has been around forever.
Yet at the same time, our industry consistently highlights how expensive it is to lose a resident. Often $4,000 to $7,000+ per unit once vacancy loss, turn costs, utilities, marketing and labor costs are factored in. The math isn’t adding up.
Multiple industry studies show that retaining an existing resident costs five to seven times less than acquiring a new one.
Renewals don’t just prevent turnover costs; they stabilize income, protect cash flow and reduce operational disruption. A strong renewal outcome often saves more net revenue than a brand-new lease creates. Especially in markets pressured by rising expenses.
