I think the idea is that you buy a house that has a lot that could easily support more houses. You live in the house that's there, and then you subdivide the l

I think the idea is that you buy a house that has a lot that could easily support more houses. You live in the house that's there, and then you subdivide the lot and sell those smaller parcels for some amount to friends/family, who then finance the build of their own home. So as the initial buyer, you're certainly spending some extra to get a house on a lot that's large enough (vs. a lot only large enough for your own house), but you're going to recoup some (all?) of that extra outlay from your friends/family. You're not financing the build of more homes yourself. Also we need to be on the same page when it comes to lot size. Here in California it's common to have a house on a quarter of an acre of land or (much) less. You could easily build 6 -- maybe even 8 -- homes (1500 sqft or so each) on a 1-acre plot here, and no one would think that's unusual. And sure, an acre of land in CA is not going to be cheap, but that certainly depends on where you buy it. But if you can get an acre for, say, $1M, and then sell sub-parcels to 5 of your friends for $200k each, that's... fine? Honestly that seems pretty standard here. But sure, in some places in CA you could get acre for $600k, or maybe less.