This reminds me of the discussion around pricing things at $x.99 instead of $x+1.00.EXAMPLE: $4.99 instead of $5.00Everyone "knows" that the price in the example is basically $5.So, why do billion dollar companies, spending more on marketing departments than everyone's combined income on this thread, STILL use the $x.99 pricing format?

The combination of all the above puts me shoulders above majority of the investors.

@Zach Denny - I agree - chances are the institutional lender won't be comfortable with an owner-financed 2nd and 100% combined loan to value.

Ultimately the pictures combined with the location are what sells it.You want to avoid HOAs at all costs.

He believes that area where he will be buying the new homes is going to appreciate and attract more MTRenters, but now, the big difference is that he would now have 3 properties that can go up (or potentially down) in value, go up (or down) in rent, and three times as many vacancies to fill.My back of the napkin assessment is that for only a drop in $200 a month in cash flow, he would control a lot more assets with growth potential and as rents rise over the coming years, the combined rents will increase to a total more than the single rent.HOWEVER.

It's a fairly unregulated space (charging grandma $750 to puts around for 3 hours, after moving the old box from the horizontal sensor, which was the only problem with the garage door to begin with), so some combination of carefully reading reviews (you have to actually read them to make sure it's not 200 fake reviews), and maybe not giving them the full contract all at once, is in order. 

Our combined efforts made the property appealing to buyers, leading to a successful sale at $99,000.

Combined income is 3X rent.

It's probably 300k maximum for the combination of 3 and I have to get them re-appraised.

How we purchased our property: Combination of Savings, Personal Loan with interest from a family member (4% interest) and a cash loan from Wells at about 8%.