.
Is the current property owner motivated to turn management responsibilities over to a master leasing person? And if so, why?
Is s/he keeping up with repairs on a timely basis, or has that been a problem? If a problem, is it because s/he is not management capable, or is too financially stressed to make repairs? If the latter, then the property is not a good candidate for master leasing — because the owner on title is still responsible for repair bills (at least, the major ones) — and if that’s a problem, this is not a good master leasing candidate.
Yes, getting an option to buy is within reason — either at the initial time of your contract, or later, depending on what you can or want to negotiate. Just remember, if you pull that trigger and exercise the option, then the property repair bills instantly become yours. Until your financials rise about the “skinny” level to where you can handle property repairs (and occasional vacancy losses) comfortably, don’t exercise that option. Other good reasons not to exercise that option: If you’re in a falling market, you’re much better off to remain in the master leasing posture — so you don’t take the hit from falling property values.
It’s very common to master lease a number of properties to build up one’s financials while keeping risk to a minimum — well before considering actual purchasing.
Best wishes,
–Dee
.