According to PennDOT, a guy with a regular license can legally operate a vehicle of up to 26,000 lbs.Assuming the law and its limits stay exactly the same and don't change to benefit the changing interests of very wealthy people and industries historically flush with cash while sticking it further to the weak, poor, and helpless (which of course never happens in America the Beautiful), that means that Pennsylvania cargo carriers will in the near future be able to pay an unskilled worker less than 1/4 of the going rate to take on reliably more than 1/3 of the typical truck load handled by a well-paid and experienced trucker.So I am rather certain that one of the first things that is going to happen is that we're going to see more smaller trucks controlled by autonomous technology with minimally paid people behind the wheel just watching the technology do the work (perhaps while they do a second unskilled job on their tablets) on all roads moving more and more cargo, while there will be a decrease of larger load carriers with expensive drivers on roads that allow trucking traffic.So if there's a road that goes over a bridge that typically has a lot of commercial tractor-trailers going over it in and out of a big shopping development primarily accessible by the bridge, I'd expect to see fewer large trucks on it and faster pickup on the smaller trucks going over it, which would increases the rate of traffic and would likely improve congestion along that artery, thus making rental properties on the less desirable side of this bridge more easily accessible by people who who don't want to pay out the nose for rental properties on the more desirable side of this bridge.

Desirable areas will always be desirable areas, and historically betting on the west coast has always paid off in the long run, but when I am looking at 700k to get started on a 3/2/2 anywhere near a place I can work in the big tech hubs, it sure smells like a bubble to me.  

Hi Matt,With prices historically high in Jersey City, it's difficult to find 2-Family properties in Jersey City Heights, Journal Square, and even some areas of Bergen-Lafayette that will cash flow.

Right now I'm in negotiations for a group of properties where the listing agent was wrong about: 1.) current lease/rent levels, 2.) zoning, 3.) historic status, and 4.) lot lines for a parcel of land.

Versus in higher appreciation markets I would rate it as forced appreciation (your property does excellent), instant equity (your property does excellent), expected property appreciation (you believe your property seems likely to have good appreciation and I am assuming have done your homework), expected rent appreciation (you believe your property seems likely to have good rent appreciation) and finally initial cash flow (your property does OK but there are many locations in the country that do better).It is not arguable (as in mathematically it can be proven) that historically financed buy n hold in appreciating markets return better ROI than low appreciation markets that provide far better initial cash flow.I do recommend that you do the full calculation of expected cash flow taking into account mortgage payment, taxes, and insurance (PITI), vacancy, maintenance, and cap expense. 

Thanks Anthony, but aren't their historical trend requirements that need the investor to have been making that sort of money for more than 2 years? 

Or possibly in an area where through the manipulation of our city government has deemed it historic and buyer demand that has increased the ARV value and is now through the roof Purely speculation on my part though.

It's my understanding that, historically, Lease Options had a high failure rate.

Plus, if a 15% return really is feasible for performing notes, that's double the long-term historical average stock market return--not too shabby!  

You want to look at historical and projected:Rent growthVacancy rateConstruction starts and completionsConstruction/absorption ratioJob growthIncome growthPopulation growthHousehold formationI also like to look at affordability by looking at rent as a percent of income.