So now if I find a property that deems worthy of an investor to flip and make a lot of $, why wouldn’t I just keep the property for myself and rehab/flip as opposed to selling for smaller profit just to let someone else do it?

So lets say you report 100k in rental income and after expenses/depreciation you have a profit of 50k.

Since I'm new to rehabs and subject to deals, I feel that paying for professional guidance up front will teach me good habits which will profit me later on, but who do I hire?

However, what you're describing sounds like a situation where you might be in that other 5%. ( I've had the luck of buying in gentrifying areas, and have profited from it- that's really how I got to the point of being able to invest in cashflowing properties) It doesn't sound like this is too much of a risk (assuming you are fully accounting for all expenses in your numbers, not just rent minus PITI), or would require too much time and or money to get into.

Once the property sells, our investors are paid off and we split the profits 50/50.

I don't know anything about your market but that property doesn't sound like it could produce 70k+moving expenses+profit.

“Strong home price appreciation in many markets boosted profits for flippers in 2013 despite a shrinking inventory of lower-priced foreclosure homes to purchase,” said Daren Blomquist, vice president of RealtyTrac.

But there is a decisive difference in the types of "Crowdfunding" and any Industry (for profit) must clearly define it's self.Then I read of all the talk that an investor must be accredited and how can we now be sure the person is accredited.

When you sell, we split the profit 50/50%.

My question is, should I hold onto the SFR hoping to gain more appreciation but risk wiping out any short term profits or sell now, take the money and really make it work for me?