Are bad news, according to nearly every experienced landlord I've seen chime in on these types of threads. 

However, it seems that many newbie investors (some with even less than my three years experience) like to chime in and talk about how great a deal landlords get when the tenants pay in full upfront. These types of replies got a lot of "votes" in a recent forum thread, implying that the community agrees with that sentiment, while more reserved opinions regarding the matter of accepting large amounts of rent upfront in order to overlook certain applicant weaknesses got much less love.

So, this thread is for experienced landlords. Can anyone relate personal stories, or anecdotes based on REAL EXPERIENCE, regarding tenants that are at least one full year old, regarding accepting rent upfront? 

I'd like to hear them. 

And, it's perfectly fair to say, "I had a tenant pay in full upfront because of X, Y, and Z. That tenant never gave me a problem, and I enjoyed the rent in full upfront, and they still live there problem free today several (more than 1) years later)." That would prove me wrong and the other enthusastic newbies right - that this is a perfectly reasonable way of doing business, with excellent outcomes for all involved.

But I bet not.

This discussion is triggered by another thread, " Would You Rent To This Applicant". A couple of investors with little more experience than myself seem to dismiss the caution of experienced investors that had some wisdom to share and "vote" for replies posted by newer investors that may not have had a full run with accepting a year of rent upfront.

My opinion: I listen to my elders on this one and would refuse basically any instance where a tenant offered to pay a full year upfront. My criteria for income, credit, and criminal background are quite reasonable for the area I operate in, and I am not willing to bend them. Any time a tenant offers to pay a year upfront is a huge red flag, even if they otherwise meet my criteria.