Even if they have the knowledge of an accredited investor (which I don't believe that studying for a test and passing it equates to years of business/investing acumen) they still don't have the net worth of a REAL accredited investor (otherwise they would be accredited without this new law).

My strategy is usually if I don't want to lose one month rent waiting for tenant which equates $100 reduction in rent, I would rather reduce that and get it rented and move on.. 

I live in Vancouver, so the Greater Vancouver Area is totally out of the equation. 

People need to understand that the allowance doesn’t necessarily equate to how much you spend.

They are very expensive with a lot of upfront fees that equate to over 20% on an $85k all in the deal.

Home owners are putting 10 to 20% down on their personal resi instead of Zero.. two reasons makes sense No PMI and so competitive that sellers want strongest offer.. so with sellers being that way the net effect is they are forcing buyers to be smarter and more conservative which equates to stronger over all market.Or maybe I am all wrong LOL

Simply enabling either side of the equation to participate in a transaction it could not otherwise might create such a benefit.  

It is not just the appreciation portion that raises the bar, the property taxes are part of the equation that many people do not fully comprehend. 

Removing Foxconn from the equation doesn't completely reverse the trajectory of the area and if it does come to fruition, should be a major tailwind. 

Also cash flow is only one per of the equation.