It's based on too many assumptions that may or may not be true, and can lead to both overpaying on a property (to the point of not being able to generate a profit) or under-bidding on a property (to the point of not being competitive and not getting any deals).I much prefer to use analysis techniques that take into account the actual cost of capital for the individual investor (are you using your own cash, borrowing hard money or something in-between), the actual cost of commissions and closing in a given demographic (sometimes the seller will pay buyer closing costs, sometimes not), the actual time you expect a rehab to take (a six month project has vastly different holding costs than a two month project), and the risk on the project (is 15% return enough or do you want 20-25% returns on more risky/costly projects), etc.70% rule is lazy (IMO) and while it's fine for a first-pass analysis, if you use it to make buying decisions, you may find it impeding your success.

He advised me to negotiate a deal with the lender.

I ordered 250 postcards that I'll be mailing out to multifamily owners that will hopefully generate refinance leads.

Please advise.

The cash I would've paid for the house has been put into something else that will definitely generate a whole lot more than the amount of interest it will cost me on my residential loan.

This works well with the under 30 generation.

There are impact fees which drive up costs, etc.My strategy in today's market would be only buy the existing duplex if you can generate positive cashflow meeting your return requirements.

Looking back, the property really didn't generate any more headaches than typical.

Granted, that's you generating that 12% more than the property or price you bought it at... but it's there as a 2nd job with a return if you want it.

It presents an opportunity for you to generate additional revenue.