Welcome to the BP forums and to the investment game that pays you to play!

@Christopher SmithI do not think it is fair to lump both prop 15 and 21 together as inherently bad. 15 stands to serve the important function of leveling the playing field for new businesses and start ups in California, who are currently paying an unfair amount in property taxes relative to older established businesses.

I would like to hear any stories in which these were factored in and how it played out, along with some suggestions on what to keep an eye out for concerning corners being cut.Thanks!

The dumb answer is making knee jerk decisions and thinking the deal plays out.

For me the equity is a bigger deal, as the long term financing limit of 75% LTV for 2-4 unit play a big roll how much trapped cash I have in the property.

Trevonte, previous experience in real estate investing does play a factor in the lender you work with and the terms you may receive.

I think the safest play is the C to B markets as in a recession like economy, A tenants will fall to B and B will fall to C.

Personally, I'd BRRR for the long term play...

Ok, so playing devils advocate (I've always believed in low LTV for safety), and out of curiosity; If you only lose money when you sell and make when you buy, and I have no plans on selling during the downs of the up and down cycles, and if my cash flow is unaffected / unrelated to market value swings, and I keep more money in reserve should I over leverage and push LTV to say 95% - is this a bad thing?

Strategy also plays a part in this (i.e.