If you are outside those areas you are taking a bigger gamble.

To answer your question, millionaires in So Cal (for example) don't mind gambling on continued appreciation in their own backyard (because meantime, they can afford the negative cash flow). 

If you were to try to sell that property tomorrow, you'd basically lose money.If you want to gamble for the appreciation, thats one thing.

Owning in FL is a gamble for hurricanes no matter what, so you might as well put a little money each year into insurance in case a hurricane does hit.

Leverage is fine, but gambling is not.

plus tenants in Las Vegas are not the best anyway so I want to have rentals where people are more about family instead of drugs and gambling..

Also, counting on appreciation is more like gambling than investing.It sounds like you have lived in this place for 2 years and have owned it for at least 5?

(I lived in two duplexes and turned one of my residences into a duplex as I was building my portfolio and those were mostly 1% deals)  If however you think the appreciation on that property will be far faster/higher than others expect then it might be worth a leaner deal at 1%, but appreciation plays are mostly speculation/gambling.  

It is a gamble for both parties, but a good solution if the seller has no equity.Florida homes may depreciate as some of the other sand states, like CA, NV and AZ.Offer to pay minor maintenance to entice the seller, but only 1st 100 dollars or so.

With the cosmetic stuff I would be gambling that higher rent to help cover the eventual HVAC and windows, or a BRRR to take cash out.I don't expect the seller to take the offer.