Long distance real estate ownership(buy and hold) in the residential rental market is not as passive as most investors would like and if you use leverage as most Real Estate investors do it can be more risky.

The real risk is in not cash flowing and having some hiccups/vacancies that make you end up missing payment and have the whole house of cards come crashing down.

Apparently, the current atmosphere in real estate (according to what I've been reading/asking/learning) is not conducive to some of the creative ideas we've come up with mostly because the lenders and/or the government would block it on the grounds that it's too risky.

Otherwise, in my opinion, just too risky.

@Brian Burke You made some good points I agree with as far a land-lord tenant exposure and risk I see as low too.

He's up to 10 properties and said that now he's been getting people to invest with him.It sounds like an interesting proposition but I'm a novice when it comes to the types of partnership/equity arrangements so I wanted to run his proposition by the community here.Basically, I would be dishing out 100% of the purchase price for the property while he would take a 50% private mortgage from me at 6% amortized over 25 years.

Frankly, it sounds pretty risky to me.

The stock market is too risky.

Because flippers are risky, and bankers hate risk.Unlike on TV, rehab projects can go bad.

One risk is the due on sale clause in the mortgage.