"Subject to" Mythological or Legendary strategy???
I know in my own research that subject to is legit strategy. I have seen the pros and cons of it throughout my own research. I have found that there is always missing pieces to the puzzle and not everything is explained. And found out that to get those missing pieces you need to pay someone to provide those missing pieces weather it is a mentor or an attorney.
I have seen a few posts on the forum regarding this "Subject to" financing as well those who teach it. Everyone does a great job explaining what subject to is and how it works. And those who mentor the strategy and how great that is. What I found most interesting is that those who spoke of the mentors only spoke that the money they paid was well worth it and even would have paid more. But when people who were curious or even skeptical, asked about deals they had done or money they had made on Subject to or from that mentorship. No responses were given just how great the mentorship was. RED FLAG in my mind.
I have been told that this strategy is legal, but it requires almost the perfect storm to work. And a lot is to be weighed on the sellers and buyers mind (legal issues). Now this isn't a bad thing but not great for beginners, I think. For an investing giant that can employ numerous mentees to do all the calling and researching for them it is a great thing. especially when your mentees are paying you to work for you.
So, as I have been given input and advice by my BP connections (Thank You). I thought it would be a good idea to get a take from those who read this post what you think. Is this a tried and trusted strategy? Or is this just a way for the big-time investors to double dip, making money not only on the acquired real estate but having mentee's pay them to do all the dirty work for them?
***These are my thoughts, not yours.*** (Barrowed from DH)
What do you think?