The agent, who seems to be concerned and ethical, interpreted that to mean they are giving up the house to me, which is fine.

All of the points above are up for debate/interpretation, but taken together, it makes me wonder which phase of the cycle we are really in.Has anyone else sensed the same feeling?

Definitions(18) "Principal broker" means an individual who is licensed as a principal broker under this chapter and who: (a) (i) sells or lists for sale real estate, including real estate being sold as part of a foreclosure rescue, or a business opportunity with the expectation of receiving valuable consideration; (ii) buys, exchanges, or auctions real estate, an option on real estate, a business opportunity, or an improvement on real estate with the expectation of receiving valuable consideration; or (iii) advertises, offers, attempts, or otherwise holds the individual out to be engaged in the business described in Subsection (18)(a)(i) or (ii);_____The general interpretation seems to be that, as a principal on the contract, you have an interest in the property allowing you to market and sell that interest. 

Deals (OK, I can't print what I actually call them) that have wrong comps, wrong data, wrong interpretation, bad pricing locked up, and a big wholesaling fee added on.  

Yes, the Washington Supreme Court recently ruled that they will interpret the "distress home consultant" definition LIBERALLY... 

But, it's also fair that we are able to verify that information being put on this forum is true and is not being misinterpreted or misrepresented (that way we can all be confident that what we are learning is in fact true).That's the reason I posted a copy of my title policies and not just my interpretation of my title policies (because, hey...I could be wrong or could have misinterpreted what my policies were saying!).

Not sure why that was interpreted as a negative post which was the premise of your reply to me. 

As always I personally don't like to make interpretations and assumptions.

I think we might be dealing with some semantics here, and again, I'm not an insurance expert by any stretch of the imagination - I was just offering my interpretation based on my years of being both a landlord and a business owner of a S-Corp.

It still seems to me that instead of "down payment" it should at least be "down payment + closing costs," because that is really what I am investing, but I do like the tool, and as long as I understand what it's doing, I can interpret the results.