Most of their posts are about negativity.

This implies renting is initially cheaper than buying and at high LTV, rentals are initially cash flow negative.  

The 1 mile income radius could be misleading in either way to the positive or negative if the property is on the right or wrong "side of the tracks" so to speak.The 80% occupancy, if it's solely due to the mismanagement of the current owner could be an opportunity. 

Also, focus on 2 years of job/income stability.Class D Properties:Cashflow vs Appreciation: Typically, all cashflow with little, maybe even negative, relative rent & value appreciationVacancy Est: 20%+ should be used to cover nonpayment, evictions & damages.Tenant Pool: majority will have FICO scores under 560 (almost 30% probability of default), little to no good tradelines, lots of collections & chargeoffs, recent evictions.

In this example the initial investment would be $50,000.So the owner of the IRA would have to pay 37% in taxes seems to negate the interest paid of 12.5% annually.Do I have this correct?

This initial negative equity position consumes the initial cash flow.  2) the addition of the adu makes the property multi family and likely makes rent control apply.  

The major negative experiences for me had to do with ship times (their updates are on the slower side) or what happens if product is damaged or arrives late. 

My net rental income was $300 to $500 a month, not enough to cover the mortgage payment (PITI) so I'm negative on what was supposed to cash flow on paper.

The cost to build will be significantly more than the amount of “value add” of an ADU putting you in a negative equity position.

People wanting to be wealthy know better.I have a unit that cash flows a NEGATIVE $700+ a month.