.- Risk Rating 2.0: That same house may now pay $1,200 if it's closer to the water and more vulnerable or $800 if it's higher up and better protected.Flood zones still matter under Risk Rating 2.0, but their role has changed. 

Jake may also shy away from the effort and vulnerability required to build a healthy relationship.

Quote from @Jonathan Klemm: Welcome back into the BP world @Dan Zambrano - I still love that you are sharing your journey here very helpful for others and vulnerable of yourself.There is still hope for a Q1 deal if you are aligned and focused....but if time doesn't permit, just keep going with the flow of life!

I have sold a couple of businesses as well, and speaking from experience, you are never more vulnerable to make a mistake than when you are sitting on a giant pile of cash.Also, I agree with @Corey Conklin - I'm a big fan of "overflow cities/towns" in the sun belt.

Quote from @Tyler Garza: Quote from @Jake Andronico: @Tyler GarzaLove the vulnerability and strategy. 

This destroys the credit of the original owner who can then sue the subto buyer.Another issue is if the subto seller claims they were taken advantage of by the subto buyer at a vulnerable time (pre-foreclosure) and an attorney or regulator raises the question of equity skimming.

The “buyer beware” philosophy is fine for commercial transactions, but taking “advantage” of home owners when they’re most vulnerable and lack market sophistication is something no right thinking person wants.  

They simply skip over/ignore concepts like vulnerable persons, equity skimming, equity stripping, bank fraud, wire fraud, mortgage fraud, escrow and closing, etc  It's now the "thing" to do.What could go wrong?

If not, paying off the STR could leave you vulnerable to unexpected expenses or downturns.

It is well and truly a scam, and the only "value" he delivers is in the form of teaching you to manipulate vulnerable people to act against their own best interests.