Because one could argue that even though the property costs less, the fact that it is in a worse neighborhood with potentially worse tenants could subject you to more and worse problems.

I would argue that any property owner, regardless how big or small they are, could compete with the level of care I give my tenants.I follow the laws and go well beyond what my responsibilities are as a landlord, mainly because, I love taking care of people and making their lives better while they’re in my buildings.

It is common in many cities for investors to get pinned into having to decide between the income stability of MF and the ability to buy in a great area zoned only for SF, but I would argue that in Tucson you truly can have both.

;) Also, not sure if it's worth pointing out... many could argue this referral fee is illegal if you aren't a licensed real estate agent.

If it suddenly becomes critical along the way based on the niche that you end up in, you will absolutely know it.If you are interested in multi-family and haven't already done so, you may want to check out Ken McElroy's book, "The ABCs of Real Estate Investing" and his "Advanced Guide to Real Estate Investing"--these are often touted as the "bibles" for multi-family investing.And, of course, the BP podcast is always FULL of ideas and inspiration, if you haven't checked that out yet.Good luck on your journey!

You can not argue with the numbers.Find me any form of lead generation that is FREE, and produces the highest quality of leads coming in at the highest quantity.This is the power of a Lead Generating Website!

Now the most important lesson of all.There is something called "ego" and there is something called "it is what it is".Your ego may push you to argue with me, and defend your public image and honor.... and by all means you can do so.. but that doesn't make what you are defending "true". 

Some will argue the hold period is actually positive as many investors mistakenly shift when things get tough.

If each of you are splitting the property 3 ways you could argue that you and your original partner keep 70% of the revenue while the investor keeps 30% due to the fact you will be running the property. 

I would argue that it's foolish for the Seller to agree to this, but there's a sucker born every minute!