There are many ways to mitigate the risk of buying houses sight-unseen.

For the sake of this question, let's use a $200,000 home(s) for my below example:If all other factors are neutral, say one had $120,000 worth of equity to put down for a leveraged investment, would one traditionally benefit more from putting all of that equity into a single property (more equity, lower interest rates, no PMI, lower monthly payment etc) OR would one typically benefit more by investing at or below the traditional 20% down and purchasing 3 properties with $40,000 down for each (more portfolio diversity, risk mitigation, potentially more cashflow etc)?

Yes, the TV shows make it look easy but unless you know what you are doing, have a team in place and are able to successfully mitigate the risks, it's unlikely you'll turn that $80K into serious wealth.

The NFIP encourages people to purchase both building and contents coverage for the broadest protection.The private flood policies are very similar however a few just simply say they will cover up to $15,000 or $20,000 so with my math it is kinda the same coverage with the NFIP and a finished living area will likely cost more to replace if you take that into consideration and build in a way that you can mitigate loss as much as possible then it might make sense as a flood insurance agent I would have to suggest to you that you do not finish anything subgrade unless you are taking on the risk of insuring whatever is not covered. 

Any good loss mitigator would advise you that if you are willing to payoff the owners mortgage in full, pay the tax and other liabilities that the bank upon being informed of a sale which covers their mortgage will delay foreclosure to allow you to close. here is my advice about the order of tasks:1. get an immediate title search to find out if their are other liens or judgment's or tax liens.2.If their are not: Draw up agreement of sale.

By the same token, I'm not likely to get into a collision when I get into my car, but I still wear my seat belt, and I have insurance, both help to mitigate the risk/damage.

Property was quickly sold with seller-financing to local investor and seller-financing will mitigate short-term capital gains.

-- What are the potential risks to cash-flow and how will you mitigate them? 

Reasons why I think I have something to offer:-property sat for 4 months with no accepted offers, was taken off the market for 4 months, and now is back on the market for the same price-I can give them the price they want, which they seemingly have not even come close to if the property has not sold yet (property is a 4 bed 5 bath on a lake, non-distressed)-I believe they will have a big cap gains tax upon sale so creative finance could help mitigate that-without working with a lender, the transaction process is easier & faster-possibility of giving them interest each paymentReasons why this might not work:-seller is under contract with an agent, to possibly do seller finance my understanding is I would need to pay the agent a commission upon sale-seller is probably not even receptive to seller finance if they are selling on the MLS-without being able to talk directly with the seller I don’t know if they have a strong motivation or pain pointDo you agree or disagree with any of my points?

Cash offers always sound great because you're cutting out the intricacies of the lender, therefore mitigating the risk of not having the deal close.