Can't really believe timing and dollars and drama is definitely added/edited in.

A friend of mine is starting a fund, where passive investors buy in (I think it's a minimum of $100k or $250k, can't quite remember), they receive 10 or 11% (works out to be 50% of a strong rental return) annually with the exit strategy to sell in 10 years, then splitting the capital gain (read: profits) 50/50 between the fund and the investors.Fairly straight forward, is this somewhat similar to what you're suggesting?

Unless there's some extenuating circumstances, in the current market we live in, I just think you could find equally good sub2 deals out there that would require you to put up considerably less upfront.The way this deal is structured doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense.

Your "all in" is $60K=$40K+$20K, which is well within the 65% ARV rule of thumb.

I guess I'd feel bad for them too, if it wasn't for the 2 big flat screen TVs that great you when you first walk in.

Maybe reach out to Jake on here I think you know him, he is very active in IE and could probably point you in the right direction.

(You will hear me preach about them depending upon the state you live in) I have one entity that consults and is reimbursed by the other entities based upon what the expenses are:I do cut myself a salary from this entity as it consults for all of my real estate activities.

As we research what we want to put in, I have my end game in mind.

You have no income or savings to help you get out of any bind you might find yourself in.

You can argue that the rents could be $100 higher, but sounds like the rising rents are already priced in.