The only purpose of this thread is to illustrate that cash flow is king when properly structured.

I don't understand how you believe NPV is illustrating equity at period 0.

As I illustrated above, a 0.8% rule in more expensive markets will do better than the 1% rule in the lower markets, and we haven't even talked about the rent growth between the more expensive and cheaper markets.

Based on their over-the-top Zestimates and recent house buying program failure, it illustrated that even these large groups don't necessarily understand the market.

The reason I'm looking for this information is because the program is very tenant friendly and therefore I'm limited in what I can do to get tenants out of my property so that I can renovate so I need to be aware of things that would lead them to basically get themselves kicked out because it would be a major failure on my part if I focus only on what I can do and then miss an opportunity.just because I know people are going to misunderstand what I'm saying here let me illustrate.

Just because it is lot listed on the illustration, as it is in a universal life, does not mean that it is not there under the hood.

I know that the purpose of your article is not related to buying vs. renting, but I wanted to illustrate the importance of the 1.1% difference between GDP per capita growth and inflation rate.

The numbers we used are typical for Single Family projects we've been involved w/ on Chicago's southside & we used them to illustrate the art of the possible.

To illustrate, there was a time where I had the opportunity to get braces for FREE, and I convinced myself that braces would be too embarassing and so I was better off just hiding my imperfect smile.

Will Barnard Your comment illustrates my point.