This seems very overpriced imo, however, if you want large tax losses to offset any other gains from other stuff then it could be a great deal if you think their could be appreciation.It's all about your internal and external goals and what you want to achieve, but on a purely numbers basis I would pass.

I'm not sure what your investment strategy or goals are, but if it's pure cash flow, honestly, the numbers are not great.

If I was going to invest purely for appreciation speculation it would be on land, which would have no cost except for taxes and could potentially pay its own way simply through selling/leasing timber, farming, or the like. 

No financing was used through a bank, this was purely the owner/builder licensure exemption.

It's not often that investors specifically target that area as it's incredibly challenging working with the tenant base, crime & the practically bankrupt city.......Is it purely a pricing play for you as you can get in there for next to free?

How was the process of getting the existing tenants to agree to the lease to own vs being a pure renter?  

I am interested in finding decent properties with pure pote really lower price points.

The sale price I posted was the asking price purely to show that at the asking price it still seemed like a good deal, I would be interested in making an offer for less.  

Additionally I invest purely for cashflow.

My question to Mike is purely mathematical: how much market must loose in order for me to start losing money from my paycheck?