Volume, cash-flow, etc are more important to us.If you are a "high-income" earner you have some tax benefits beyond the cash-flow that come into the equation (depreciation, etc).Most of the regulars here buy purely on cash-flow as we get killed if we have negatives or small earners.

-For a pure land loan, you are realistically looking at a LTV of 50%.

Everyone has their own utility function for how hard they want to work vs how wealthy they want to be, so there is no universal answer to that question...It's like cap rate...once the discussion turns to personal details of specific investors, the pure numbers go out the window...

In other words, an inch of rain water would equate to about 10" of powdery snow if the temperature was cold enough.So, an inch of rain or pure ice over some square footage could weigh up to 10 times more than an inch of snow over the same area!

Buying for appreciation is pure speculation, not investing.

So the expectation of price for a single family residence is much higher than it would be for a purely investment property.

It's pure persuasion wizardry.

This a mediocre rental regardless of the area, as a pure rental.

From a pure accounting perspective, properties should be valued at their total cost (COGS for flips and total investment for rentals).

I would never try to maximize pure ROI without factoring in the riskiness of the activity.