cheaper houses for volume or more expensive better quality houses

[William Roberts]

I am looking to start purchasing houses to rent in the near future and, currently, I am considering purchasing in Louisville, KY and wanted some feedback on the type of property to invest in.

I was wondering what people experiences have been with starting in real estate investing by purchasing cheaper older houses expecting a higher turnover rate vs. spending a bit more and trying to find longer term tenants .

I have thought of pros and cons of both but I am considering starting out with cheaper houses and eventually, after having several units, purchasing more expensive units to try to get more long term tenants.

cheaper houses higher volume pros:

1) allow me to pay off the property sooner

2) allow me to purchase more units faster

3) Easier to afford if unit goes un-rented

cons

1) higher maintenance costs due to age of house

2) higher turnover rate for tenants due to proximity to college campus

3) depending on property manager, turnover rate could drive up the cost of management

more expensive, lower volume pros

1) lower maintenance costs

2) possibility of lower turnover if long term tenants are found

3) nicer houses allowing higher rent

cons

1) would take longer to save up to purchase

2) possibly more straining to pay mortgage if unit goes un-rented

3) possibly lower profit margin due to higher mortgage payment

I know there are many more pros and cons for both but those are the top 3 of each for me.

Again, I am leaning towards first investing in cheaper houses to be able to pay them off faster and purchase more units down the line. the goal is to own both types of properties eventually to diversify.

I just wanted to know everyone's experiences, ideas and maybe if you have had better profits with renting houses in volume  vs lower volume higher quality unit rentals