I agree with Jason - there has to be enough skin in the game to bait an investor - BUT also remember that depreciation provides a paper loss that shelters rental income from taxes, boosting after-tax cash flow.

It could just as easily be $200. or $1000. because the Real point is to get the 'investor' to get some of Their skin in the game.

They usually put (in my opinion) insufficient skin in the game (which financially misaligns the sponsor from the investor). 

Very simple.Of course, lender fees and third-party closing fees (title/insurance/appraisal) are not typically covered and are expected to be the borrower's skin in the game.

The 100% purchase and rehab lenders expect the borrower to have the liquidity to cover the closing costs as well as having some excess liquidity beyond these costs to be able to run the project well (i.e. to contribute some investment into the project and to have skin in the game).

If im wrong for thinking this it's ok, I got tough skin.

I label you a CON.Because in my experience only CON's go to the extents and actions you have shown here to OBFUSCATE, distort, spin and use insults of things like skin color or ageism as a defense. 

I would be able to put skin in the game however would not be able to fund the entire project.

An unsophisticated lender might send all the construction funds to you.Other than for a refinance, or from an unsophisticated lender, you, or more typically your contractor, will receive funds in draws as you complete your project.Most, but not all, first-position lenders will only lend a percentage of your purchase price and expect you to wire in some amount of cash as your “skin in the game.”

I'm not at all familiar with any of those markets so I have no skin in the game here but I'm curious what strategies or applied logic you used to help narrow it down to those areas.