Im an outsider coming from an outside perspective so im just trying to understand why going out to the suburbs would be less beneficial then going out of state.

This is beneficial IF the  value of the house appreciated in 6 months.

I think that you have a specific competitive advantage over casual investors in that you work full time in the field and can create opportunities based on your knowledge disparity vs the general public and should be looking to capitalize on that especially if you don't have millions in the bank.I took a similar path and it has been extremely beneficial for both facets of my business. 

I'd recommend you do your normal due diligence on these folks, but the concept is pretty well established as beneficial.

I was intrigued by the topic of "opportunity zones" discussed on the BP Podcast episode 269 (the one about RE & taxes).As I understand it, it seems almost like a "1031 exchange" type of investment vehicle but rather than property<>property, you could use other equity assets like stocks or mutual funds to invest in designated opportunity zones in low income neighborhoods via opportunity zone funds.

So you determined that it would be more beneficial for you to retire the title.

If two sides come to a mutual agreement that's a reasonable way to go, don't let it become a legal action.

I am curious which offer everyone thinks would be most beneficial for me in the end.

If you plan to buy multiple properties a year you will save on commission, it’s another source of revenue,you can bid on multiple properties, it’s leverage to network with other agents, you learn the valuation of property, and most importantly you move on your terms.Having an agent license is very beneficial when starting out and you have a full time job.

I can see, however, that REITs could be pyramid schemes with some fancy accounting and work disguising the lack of real ownership - but, for that matter, so could any mutual fund in theory.