Others argue it’s a complete waste of time and money, especially if your goal is to flip properties fast using private or hard money.From my experience (and from talking to other investors), there are pros and cons to both approaches:Pros of having a license: Access to MLS and off-market listings.Can save on commission costs when buying and selling.Potential credibility boost with agents, lenders, and sellers.Cons of having a license:Time and cost to get licensed and maintain it.Paperwork, continuing education, and compliance responsibilities.Many flippers find they can build strong networks without a license, using wholesalers, hard money lenders, and private connections.Here’s the big question for the community:“Would you get a real estate license if your goal is strictly to flip houses?

Knowledge of the market or process so that you don't waste their time.

Always interesting to hear different approaches since refinancing can either unlock massive growth or cut into cash flow if done too early.

Here in Cali, if you get into an eviction you need to cut that tenant off.

Most people replying these days are selling something, and their posts are either ChatGPT responses or cut and pasted.

This is to avoid any misconceptions, and allow would be time wasters (people with 6 German Shepherds) to move onto another property instead of wasting mine and their time.

However, I knew that if I had a bigger cut of the pie, I'd be more satisfied.

People get too carried away with living completely for free, but literally cutting your living expenses down at all is still progress. 

I know a lot of investors don’t like sharing their agents for obvious reasons, but how can I do this efficiently without wasting time on trial and error?

No you're not wasting your time in the Twin Cities.