I advertise "We'll pay 100% of your asking price", or "I'll pay 90% of your asking price". People are easily driven to a website, www.fullpricehomeoffer.com or www.sell90.com , and the system automatically explains itself to them, then makes them offers by e-mail , follows up by e-mail every 3 days until they reply, and then sends them the contracts... all on auto-pilot.

I may not even talk to them until they've agreed to my terms, lol. SO... here's my question.... Because I use that "line" (100% of asking price) in my ads, I can literally make dozens of offers a week to almost ANY type of seller... they don't have to be desperate anymore.

Because of this, I can step up my marketing machine and get lots and lots of leads, but with smaller profit margins... $4000 - $6000 - $10,000, etc etc.

Originally, I felt I'd advertise the 100% offer and get lots of deals, but now I'm wondering if I should do less deals, but make more $ on each?

What would you guys do? Since it's so "hands off", should I take everything I can get, or should I not work as hard and take only the 90% deals and the "better" 100% ones?

One big difference, is the 90% deals are all "cashed out" within 60 days or less, so I'm walking away from those with a check. The 100% deals are more of a "buy and hold" type of transaction, so although I pay more, I may make more $ in the long run.

The whole theory behind the program is it makes it easier for me to find "regular" sellers, since I can advertise to buy at full price. I'll have more leads, but since it's automated, I will still work less hours.

What would you do? Do you have to have a "minimum" amount of profit in a deal before you'll take it on, even if you know you'll still make $ and have partners to walk you through each deal a step at a time?

Z