I actually do not aim for LVT to be cashflow positive. That's...

I actually do not aim for LVT to be cashflow positive. That's not the true objective any investor should be looking for.

We want them to spend big now, and forego being Cashflow Positive, if that means the spending now will lock in future annual revenue streams for years to come.

To quote VMK:
"If $100 dollars of cash now can generate $50 of ARR annually for 15 years ($750) I hope that LVT considers spending that cash, subject to market conditions"

That's the whole reason why we invest in shares, isn't it?

My $100 can turn into $102 if I keep it in a high-interest savings account
My $100 can turn into $104 if I buy Big4 bank shares (4% Dividends with SP stable)
My $100 can turn into $110 if I buy a property (10% annual average growth across most property portfolios)

What if I wanted to grow my $100 a lot quicker? I can't do it on my own, so I'll invest in vehicles that can. And this is the beauty of the equity market.

LVT is one such vehicle. Using VMK's example, if I invest $100 in LVT, and LVT takes my $100 and has the ability to turn it into $50 for 15 years, I'd be laughing so hard. I don't care if my $100 becomes only $50 next year, because I'm getting another 14 years of $50 down the line.

It's brilliant!

Ladies and gentlemen, THAT is why you invest in the equity market - it allows us to grow our wealth meaningfully in ways we would not be able to as individuals (unless you run your own business). Albeit with higher risk of course, the risk/reward relationship will always be there.