As a lender, I'm sure you know a million agents, but you may consider finding one who owns investments, and therefore understands not only the mathematical calculus of divesting from an investment, but the emotional ramifications as well. 

But i'm getting better at giving her mathematically backed answers and she's slowly coming around.

But it is not 90/10 - the notion is correct, but it's mathematically incorrect, because there are literally over a couple thousand agents in Milwaukee that do less than 5 transactions a year.

It's not only mathematically impossible we ever repay it, we are also at the door step of mathematical impossibility to service it....

.: @Chris SeveneyI've posted on other threads - i'm not really changing my strategy in response to the macro changes, just accepting less cash flow as long as I get the other benefits. mathematically speaking this is given as spread between bond and appreciation/cash flow has reduced LOL you would be okay as you are veteran on this lol

It doesn’t mathematically add up to me in this scenario with these numbers, but I fully admit I may STILL be missing something.

It is a mathematical certainty, as these components age out over different timelines across the portfolio.

I know you were looking for mathematical formulas, but for me this Overrides any math.

I think it is more psychological thank mathematics to have the payoff period reduced.

You can disagree all you want about my opinions but that's plain mathematics and mathematics ultimately tell the truth.