Though if you are the builder, you can do do this for under $100 SQ FT (I'm not builder, nor a hammer/nails guy).

If they try to use creative ways to bring up value they get hammered by their clients even if it is obvious the home is worth what they are saying it is.

The next big point being hammered home is paperwork.

I'll bet that is the case as an out of state licensee has no particular knowledge as to Texas laws, requirement or customs, my assumption not knowing TREC regulations.......if there is, then I violated the TREC but they'd have a heck of a time asking Mo to lower the hammer on me.Investors should never do DIY disclosures thinking you're CYAing, most likely you're opening the door to further insight into your knowledge and expertise, your efforts become self defeating, attempting to avoid any responsibility normally associated in business transactions, the more you say the deeper you get.

Whether you're talking real estate, physics or whatever, most formulas will break down for some set of cases or inputs.Oftentimes, formulas break down at the extremes (Einstein would certainly agree), so it's not surprising that rules of thumb (like the 70% rule) also break down at extremes (under $100K and over $1M).An investor who says the 70% rule isn't a good rule of thumb because it doesn't work in every case is like a carpenter who says his hammer is useless because it doesn't work for every carpentry task.A seasoned investor has a full tool bag worth of tools, and pulls out the right one at the right time.

While Bill dropped the hammer on other concepts here.

He found a niche and literally hammered it.

The "No Contingencies" statement is becoming more and more common, because there's a trend in Real Estate for buyers to make an offer, have it accepted, and then use a painfully meticulous inspection to try to hammer the seller to reduce the price further.

@James Woodrich  well to answer your question about anyone who invested before 2008.. that be me.I was basically retired by then.. but then the crash  rentals went poof loans went poof.. developments went poof.. commercial buildings I had that were great my tenants were going banko.kind of depended on the area some areas likeVegas,  PHX  ATL  FLA  central CA  Inland empire  in urban areas of most MSA's they all got hammered places went vacant.. many multis got below sustainability and or loans were due and had to be called it was a nightmare.. long standing billion dollar real estate firms like Opus from your area TOAST it was all across the board .. some areas not so bad others as stated huge wipe out.for me I lost millions.. and first to admit .. but then I did not lose my ability to get whence I came I just retooled and went after it again.. so that was when I was 51 when that happened now I am 61 and about back to where I was and frankly like many in our business after your second or third wipe out you get stronger.. so for me now and I know its Totally contrarian on BP but I am debt adverse have  very little and have no interest in quote un quote good debt.. there was NO good debt back in 08.just ask all the new syndicators that are doing these deals where the deals came from last crop that lost them or did not have the money to properly maintain them.. and investor that bought with 100 cash flow max debt I ended up owning about 250 of those homes from those that I foreclosed on that bought under these exact same scenarios your all talking about.so that's my experience now I am MR> Blue sky and I am not predicting a 08 wipe out by any means but as one ages and lives through that nightmare ( and one of the few of my peirs that did not get totally wiped out and did not BK)  I am just way more conservative now..

You and your account and the buyer and their accountants can hammer out the relative value ratio between Real estate and FF&E.