Does a one-year corporate lease at $2,800 beat a standard twelve-month at $2,200 after you price in the furnishing cost and the faster turnover

Your math is solid and your conclusion is honest: at one unit, the financials are roughly a wash, and the corporate version costs you time you are not pricing in.

The assumption doing the most work here is the 45-day vacancy figure. That number is generous to the corporate case, and it is also the variable you have the most control over. If you have a signed relocation-company relationship before the first tenant exits, that gap compresses significantly. If you are sourcing ad hoc through Furnished Finder or word of mouth, 45 days could easily become 75, and at $2,800 in lost gross that matters. The gap risk is not symmetric: a standard tenant who leaves early is one problem, but an empty furnished unit near a supplier corridor in a secondary market like Peoria means you are competing for a narrower pool.

The risk you did not mention is furniture depreciation. Your $6,200 furnishing cost is a year-one outlay, but after 24 months of corporate occupancy you will likely face a second-round refresh on soft goods and some hard items. Budget at minimum $800 to $1,000 for that, and it shifts your 24-month net further toward the standard lease.

What you are actually buying with the corporate path here is market knowledge and a client relationship. That has real value if you plan to scale, but only if you treat this unit as a testing ground deliberately: track where the tenants come from, which employers are paying the bills, whether any relocation coordinator mentions needing more inventory. That is the infrastructure the numbers cannot show.

On the operational side, confirm with your lender whether the furnished-premium income gets underwritten differently for future acquisitions. Some lenders treat it differently from long-term lease income and that affects how you grow.

What is your current connection to the TSMC supplier corridor specifically, and do you have a relocation company or employer contact lined up before close?

The 45-day gap is your whole thesis right there. If you are actually calling the staffing agencies that place into that corridor before you close, you will know whether 45 days is conservative or optimistic. If you have not made those calls yet, that is the only number in your model you cannot estimate from a spreadsheet.

I ran a similar gut-versus-math situation on my Wisconsin storage when I was deciding whether to expand before I sold, and gut lost. What are the relocation coordinators actually telling you about placement timelines in that submarket?

The numbers are already telling you something, just not what you expected: the corporate model does not pencil on a single unit because fixed costs (furnishing, your time, utilities) do not spread across enough doors to shrink per-unit. At three or four units running the same corporate program, that $6,200 furnishing outlay becomes a shared linen inventory, bulk utility accounts, and one system instead of one-off scramble, and the gap risk averages out across placements rather than hitting a single revenue stream.

The real question is whether Peoria's TSMC corridor demand is deep enough to keep a 90-day rotation full without a corporate housing platform feeding you placements, because if you are sourcing tenants yourself the gap assumption of 45 days is probably optimistic for unit one.

What is your current plan for sourcing the corporate tenants, direct to the suppliers, a furnished-finder type listing, or something else?

The gap assumption is doing more work than any other number in your analysis.

Forty-five days of vacancy spread across twenty-four months assumes you will fill the unit consistently except for one rough patch, but near a supplier corridor running 90-day rotations, the real risk is sequential gaps: one placement ends in December, the next company's engineer doesn't start until February, and suddenly you have lost sixty days in a single rotation rather than forty-five across two years. The conservative case breaks the math faster than your current model shows. What I would want to know before committing to the corporate path is whether you have any visibility into actual placement cycles from the companies feeding that corridor, because "demand is real" and "demand is predictable enough to underwrite" are different claims. If you can get even one facilities coordinator or relocation contact to tell you their typical rotation calendar, you can replace your gap estimate with something derived from actual behavior rather than a reasonable guess. That changes the analysis entirely, and it also tells you whether you are building a business or taking a vacancy bet.

What is your current access to the companies pulling workers into that corridor, and have you spoken to anyone on the corporate housing or relocation side yet?

The assumption doing the most work is that the gap is 45 days and not 90.

If that corridor runs on project rotations rather than permanent relocations, a supplier engineer finishes an 18-month assignment and the next placement takes two months to materialize, not six weeks. Run the same 24-month model with two 60-day gaps instead of one 45-day gap and the corporate net drops another $3,700, which puts it firmly below the standard lease before you account for your time. The demand near a fab supplier corridor is real, but it tends to cluster around construction and ramp phases, and Peoria is not Phoenix, so the bench of companies sending people there is narrower than it looks from the TSMC headline. Do you have a direct contact at a relocation company or a single employer in that corridor who would commit to a master lease arrangement, because that one variable converts the gap risk from probabilistic to contractual?

Your gut is chasing the learning curve, not the cash, and that's fine as long as you name it that way going in.

The number I'd want pinned down before I did anything is what the actual placement cycle looks like on that corridor right now, not in theory. TSMC supplier work can run 6-month rotations just as easy as 90-day ones, and if you land even one 180-day placement you just cut your turn cost and gap risk in half without changing anything else.

Who's placing the workers into housing near that site, a relocation company or the employers direct?

What's your source on the TSMC supplier corridor demand, direct contact with a relocation coordinator or just proximity logic?

The Peoria flip reference is me flinching a little, because I know that market does not forgive optimistic assumptions and you are making a few here. The one I keep staring at is the two turns a year minimum, because in my California STR experience, the 90-day block tenant who actually renews for another 90 days is rarer than the one who leaves after 60 because their project wrapped early or their company cut the housing stipend. Three turns at $400 is probably closer to four turns at $500 once you factor in the deep clean a corporate tenant expects versus what a standard tenant tolerates.

What I would want to know before committing to the corporate model on this specific unit: do you have an actual company or relocation firm already interested, or are you building toward a demand assumption? Because the TSMC supplier corridor story is compelling on paper, but "close to" can mean a lot of things in Peoria, and if your direct corporate bookings fall through you are on Furnished Finder competing with people who have been doing this for three years and have 40 reviews.

The part that caught me was the $400 per turn estimate. I've seen that number climb fast once you factor in a professional clean on a furnished unit, because standard cleaners quote differently when there's a full kitchen and linens involved. In Denver I've watched turn costs on a similar setup run $650-700 once you add a linen replacement cycle every third turn and the inevitable broken item nobody admits to breaking.

What's your actual pipeline source for the corporate placements, do you have a direct contact inside one of those suppliers or are you going through a relocation company?