When speed is critical, the biggest mistake is treating funding as a rate decision instead of a structuring decision.The most effective approach I see is lining up capital that’s already comfortable with the asset type and risk profile, rather than forcing a deal through a lender’s approval process mid-transaction.In practice, that usually means:Pre-aligned capital for acquisitions or bridge scenariosClear understanding of what diligence can be deferred vs. what cannotStructuring around certainty of execution, not just pricingDeals that move fastest are usually the ones where the exit and takeout path were thought through before the LOI was signed, not after.

Your commitment toward maintaining effective communication inside loans, partnerships, etc is what will set you apart - DRASTICALLY.I'll be honest, challenges we endure in life aren't to test us.

This makes it difficult to know which specific year will be the one evaluated against a 1.25 DSCR requirement.To account for this, I’ve been treating a smoothed 1.15 DSCR as effectively equivalent to a 1.25 DSCR in years without major CapEx events, since the actual cash flow in those years would be materially higher.Is this a reasonable way to think about DSCR risk and lender underwriting, or is this logic off-base?

@Will StewartOnce you get to a 5 unit or more property, all loans are effectively DSCR. 

The rule of “unintended consequences” also leads us to conclude some other effects of buyers paying their agents directly, (without the “work around”) developed by the NAR, which was the original intention of the regulators in suing the NAR.  

I think it's a very effective strategy, of course who you lend to is critical. https://www.sofi.com/learn/content/self-directed-401k/

Quote from @Eric Blair: Although I think it’s good to give homes to actual citizens, I seriously doubt deportations have had any effect on housing prices at all.

Diversify your support systems: multiple maintenance vendors, backup property management software, on-site and off-site teams, and emergency cash reserves.This limits the "single point of failure" effect that creates exponential problems when stress hits.5.

This provides a protection for unpermitted units that did not exist prior to sb13.The cost has many dependencies including the current quality (is the work to code), how thorough the jurisdiction will be in verifying to code, the size of the ADU (less than 750’ has lower fees than those greater than 750’), cost of your contractors, and many other things that could effect the cost.To be blunt a jurisdiction can make it costly to bring to code or make it easy.Good luck

But not sure how effective that process will be.