Skip to content
×
Try PRO Free Today!
BiggerPockets Pro offers you a comprehensive suite of tools and resources
Market and Deal Finder Tools
Deal Analysis Calculators
Property Management Software
Exclusive discounts to Home Depot, RentRedi, and more
$0
7 days free
$828/yr or $69/mo when billed monthly.
$390/yr or $32.5/mo when billed annually.
7 days free. Cancel anytime.
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here

Join Over 3 Million Real Estate Investors

Create a free BiggerPockets account to comment, participate, and connect with over 3 million real estate investors.
Use your real name
By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions.
The community here is like my own little personal real estate army that I can depend upon to help me through ANY problems I come across.
Buying & Selling Real Estate
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

Updated over 11 years ago on . Most recent reply

User Stats

1,083
Posts
412
Votes
Deborah Burian
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Oklahoma City, OK
412
Votes |
1,083
Posts

To Tenant, or not to Tenant, that is the question...

Deborah Burian
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Oklahoma City, OK
Posted

So... I'm thinking of selling a two-bed to upgrade to a three-bed or even pay down a line of credit and try some of the crazy stuff all y'all keep talking about on the blog posts...

The house is turnkey and ready to rent... is it better to place a tenant or leave it vacant and let the buyer suit herself? It's a rent house through and through and unlikely, I think, to get much traction as a private home, although if I go the agent route I definitely would leave vacant.

I would love to hear the opinions on this.

Thanks in advance.

  • Deborah Burian
  • Loading replies...