I'm weighted towards RE but I have been buying in the public markets recently (stocks, index funds, bonds, REITs, Master Limited Partnerships, Business Development Companies).

In this model, the property owner keeps full control and ownership of the property—there’s no risk of losing it.Flexible and Ongoing Funding:Instead of getting one lump sum upfront (like with a loan), owners can gradually raise money by selling income rights.

Right now you have a market where existing landlords have all these properties at cheap prices where they can afford to charge less for rent than new buyers and many don't want to shock their tenants by jumping rents by $400+ in one rental cycle... so we are gradually easing those tenants upwards each year.  

Overall, weight the pros and cons of a switch in manager and whether another manager would make the same or similar decisions in other circumstances.

If the current rents are below market, maybe it’s time for some modest increases, from what I’ve heard many landlords do this gradually.

Or is it more common for land investors to self-fund and scale gradually?

My portfolio is heavily weighted towards real estate, largely because of California appreciation.

Gradually raising rents, exploring lease buyouts, or selling with tenants in place are balanced alternatives.

His lawsuit and others have no weight.

It's like only using weight to measure fitness.