States like CA, NY, CT, NJ, MD are notorious for high sale price homes, higher taxes and hard to cash flow.

I always invested in the “higher end of the lower end,” starting small and working my way up so the banks had no issues financing my next property.

On one of my visits to meet the team they were showing me the many areas in the US they decided not to build or locations that made more sense for higher renter demand.

Jaedon, that’s a question I’ve seen stir up a lot of debate, especially these days when the cost of capital and property prices can feel like they’re arm-wrestling over who goes higher.

Investing locally in the Bay Area will come with higher acquisition costs, but appreciation can still build wealth long term, so don't be weary if you're property doesn't cash flow right now the bat.

Pros include securing the desired property and strategic planning, while cons involve higher costs, financing challenges, and complexity.

Longer tenancies mean lower turnover and vacancy costs, so two single-family homes usually generate more reliable income and higher net cash flow than a fourplex.Vacancy risk: A fourplex has four times the vacancy risk of a single-family home.

Beacon you would want to be near the train and it's priced higher than the Catstkills - same with Hudson.

Most are single families in the $1.5-$2M range, so we new that a duplex would be would have a much higher ARV than other duplexes in the area.

This concerns me about the potential to maintain a solid tenant base and would likely cause a higher vacancy factor.