For all the importance of cash flow, it's only one part of the trifecta for building long term wealth that includes future appreciation and principal reduction. 

Property manager says 3,000 a month is high for all units with market rates.So if you use 2,500 X 12 = 30,000 gross expected incomeIf landlord pays water generally lop off 55% of gross income for property management, turnover, repairs,etc.30,000 X .45 (55% costs) = 13,500 NOI before any debt service if not paying cash.13,500/160,000 = 8.4% cap rate going inNow since the building is from the 1920's there could be all kinds of deferred maintenance that needs to be a credit from the seller or a reduction off of the price. 4 units are not typically valued on cap rate but the comparable sales method used with appraisals.  

Assuming the after-rehab value is correct, and not overblown, you can suffer a 20% value reduction on this property and still be whole (150k x 20% = 30).

That's why I don't think a rent reduction is really necessary.

It will take me longer to find what I want, but I think the reduction in "headache factor" will be worth it.

Then it is only a deferral not a true reduction, so don't factor it in.

Edmonton has better cash flow, and the corresponding reduction in appreciation potential.    

The influx of young and more-educated workers offsets those reductions to some extent.

My first thought is to go back to the seller for a price reduction equal to pipe replacement costs.

Since it has not had a showing in a month of being listed, I accept and understand that a price reduction is in order.