If you measure the totality of your investment, mean cash flow, debt reduction, appreciation, rent growth etc you will always make more money in the areas of high demand like DC, Boston, Seattle etc than you will make in a pure cash flow market like you will in the mid west.There is always the possibility of your rate going higher, but thats the trade off of a lower rate with the arm.

It's purely added scope. 

Not purely an investment?) 

On the positive, there are more analytics that are available to this kind of lending.  2006 lending was pure sloppiness.  

Then I hired a “big” PM firm- which was a pure disaster- the permanent turnover of the staff, skyrocketed repairs.

#3 is pure nonsense. that leads me to worry about the rest of what you are hearing from the HML. 

Until that point, I am here to read / listen and learn.I am likely looking to purchase in my area (Pittsburgh) and have some ideas about what neighborhoods specifically, but these are just instincts and purely anecdotal in any event, so I would love to engage in discussions about what areas around here would work for the buy and hold rental income strategy.Thanks!

I would rather buy in a city a home for 250,000 that appreciates over time purely based on the economics of that city and it ends up being worth 400,000.

As lender, can I obtain insurance, purely at my own expense?

The big difference is the Pits pure power and strength.