That steady stream of good income is hard to pass up, especially early on in an investment career.

That aside, I am now looking into the income stream part of the equation.I was given an estimated income projection for one of the house and it was MUCH LESS than I thought.Also half the homes have been on mkt since my last vacation 2 yrs ago.For me this will be a LONG TERM hold.I originally wanted to hold off for later in life, BUT my kids are still young and we will have a lot more use for it now than later when they are in college etc.Also when I chk vrbo 2014 calendar, some homes are already fully booked for summer 2014... of course the ones that rents have wonderful reviews and provide summer lake front fun filled homes.Thanks for your help

Is it a steady stream that will provide a stable income stream, Is it seasonal, Is the market going to exist into the foreseeable future and if not how far into the future might it exist.An outsider looking in should spend more time because they no so little about the market.

ps. for all you "money and business is everything types" -you'll find out in the big scheme of things you really can't buy the truly important things.and lastly has anyone seen the movie Pay It Forward ?

I recently watched "Jericho", a TV miniseries that is now available streaming from Netflix.

Can anyone tell me what movie that is from?

But there are some big moves coming into the city (medical mart / convention center, aquarium by a private investor, guy from iron chef just opened up a shop) and the house is a few houses down from the house on the movie "A Christmas Story".

What the big O is doing here is good, you will now have to get the tenant to kick in some more money, maybe cut back to a 42 inch TV from the 60 inch they wanted to buy, or do without a cable movie once a week or so.

Surely if it happens in a movie, it must happen in real life.

I think what both of you are saying is that likelihood (or probability) is less when you are not leveraged (fewer units) , The impact could be more severe than if you leveraged and owned more units Let me quantify Basis From example above $300K start with $50 K houses / Rent $750 Expenses (%50) $375 ( you still have taxes and insurance regardless if you carry a mortgage or not) Appreciation 5% Option 1 Buy 6 $50K houses free and clear Starting equity = (300K value – 0 Loan Balance) = 300K Income = $750 Expenses (%50) $375 Cash Flow $375 Times 6 units = 2250 Month (same as Mr Duncan Demo) Option 2 Buy 12 $50K houses ($25K Down, $25K Financed) Starting equity = (600K value – 300K Loan Balance) = 300K Income = $750 Expenses (%50) $375 P&I (25K at %5 for 30 years yields monthly payment of $134 Cash Flow $240 Times 12 units =$ 2880 Month Risk assessment / Management While the probability of getting a bad tenant is more with the greater # of units, The IMPACT would be less: Risk Analysis Hazard : getting a bad tenant that late/skips on rent Effect: you lose one months rent ($750) Probability of Incidence (PofI) = in our example 1 in 20 (5%) Option 1 PofI = 6 units *(.05) = 30% chance Impact + (-$750 cash flow ) -> Net cash goes from $2250 to (2250-750) $1500 a (%33) decrease Option 2 PofI - 12 units * .05 = %60 chance you get stuck Impact = ((-$750) cash flow -> net cash goes from $2880 to (2880 – 750) 2130 = 26% decrease So while the chance Is greater with multiple units , the impact is lessoned due to the other income streams.