I'll try to post all the numbers then...Sale Price: 35,000Estimated Repairs: 10,000Closing Costs: 2000Acquisition Cost: 28,000-----------------------------------------------------------------Mortgage: 21,000 - 30years @ 5%Down: 7,000-----------------------------------------------------------------Cash Needed: 19,000Income: Rent: 1000/monthExpenses:Mortgage (Principal + Interest): 112.73Taxes: 208.33Insurance: 100PM: 100Vacancy: 50  (5%)Repairs: 50  (5%)CapEx: 50  (5%)Total Expense: 671.07Income - Expense = 328.93 x 12 = 3,947.16Cash on Cash ROI = 20.77%$1000 rent on a property you're all into for $47,000 is great (unless it's in a war zone). 

I plan to always keep one to manage ourselves, so we don't lose touch with what tenants want in a property.As SFR section 8 and mobile home landlords, the stories are too numerous to convey.

Martin I agree with you I was buying lots at tax sale in east Palo Alto for 2 to 5k each late 70's and you know what a war zone that was then.  

Hey guys, I'm fairly new to this forum but have found numerous good examples of rental suggestions and such.

Ich bin zwar Ami, sogar Texaner, aber war einige Jahre in Deutschland unterwegs (in der Naehe von Muenster). 

For me as a value investor the key requirement is to have a margin of safety and one of the main ways to have a margin of safety with income properties is to have good positive cash flow.Some people have hard boundaries around cash flow, like a deal must cash on cash 10 or 12% but in a 2.2% 10yr Treasury world to get that kind of spread requires battling in war zones or taking on serious risk of some kind.

Next, in a casual conversation at lunch, old guys usually like to tell war stories, ask where the property was.

Dawn Anastasi has a similar story in podcast 29.Based on the above, it seems low-cost houses can be found outside of war zones.

The tenants are getting a bit restless - with numerous visits from inspection, appraisal, survey, plus however many visits from potential buyers prior to all this.What surprises me is the estoppel letter actually sounds like the lender is injecting itself into the lease by adding these terms to the letter the tenants are required to sign.I will not agree to any modifications of the Lease nor make any prepayments of rent without the prior written consent of LENDER.In the event I receive a notice from you stating that all future rents should be paid to you, I will comply with such notice without setoff as to any claims I make then (or in the future) against the Landlord (or any of its successors).I recognize that you are relying on this Certificate in making a loan to my Landlord (or its Successor).I hereby agree that the Lease be subordinated to any Mortgage from Landlord in favor of LENDER and all additional and or future advances, thereunder, and to any and all extensions, renewals and modifications thereof, and said LENDER shall be and is hereby agreed to be made prior, paramount and superior to any of my right, title, or interest as tenant under the Lease and I hereby agree to subordinate any and all of my rights under the Lease to LENDER.Is this usual and customary? 

Even Section 8 tenants don't want to live in war zones.