Given the current market, where it is hard enough to find a deal without a third party making money, I don't see how that would work.

I just saw this, and though I am 5 months late to the party, I want to answer some of these questions for the record.

There is a concept in the law where when a contract has ambiguity it will be interpreted in favor of the party that did NOT write the contract.

I know that OF agreements will be whatever two parties agree on, but I'm hoping to gain a better understanding of what might be possible that I haven't considered. 

Thanks Matt, I forgot about take part. I

Understand the tax implications for both parties and ensure you get clear title to the property.

The paying off debt sooner rather than later part is essentially just being done to give us financial freedom and the ability to leave our jobs quicker.

Most “Gurus”, authors, advisors and experienced real estate investors preach obtaining seller “carry back” financing for property buyers in order to (1) obtain financing when they don’t qualify for a 3rd party loan (2) obtain financing when the property doesn’t qualify for financing and or (3) extend the “buying power” of their capital contribution (down payment) to purchase a larger more expensive property by having the seller provide a subordinated mortgage loan.That’s all and good, but why should the seller agree to finance the purchase of his property, instead of getting CASH for his equity?

Probably I would not worry about it as I don't tend to talk about my 3rd parties whether they were good or bad.

Concessions are also somewhat difficult to comprehend, since real estate can be a game of telephone, sometimes the transaction is just better off, without attempting to get four parties to understand the numbers.