Zane Schartz
President at Freedom Commercial Real Estate | Financial Freedom Through 100% Passive and Cash Flowing Real Estate Opportunities | Telling the World About the Hope of Jesus
Zane Schartz teaches accredited investors how to evaluate and acquire single-tenant retail real estate deals by breaking down actual acquisitions with specific financial metrics. His most distinctive move is opening with a concrete dollar amount and tenant name, then immediately introducing conflict or surprise (vacancy, lease structure risk), which creates the cognitive tension that drives his 46.7% conversation rate.
5.7/wk
74 posts in 30d
297
avg per post
46.7%
comments / total
0.1%
reposts / total
numbered list with financial breakdown
Wed · 9 PM CET
Voice & tone
Direct, fiduciary-minded, and grounded in specifics rather than hype. He speaks as someone who has 'been prepared for each' crisis and wants to educate LPs on what to ask sponsors. The tone is confident but not boastful. Phrases like 'Here's the good news' and 'Curious to hear your thoughts' invite dialogue rather than lecturing. He treats his audience as intelligent capital allocators, not beginners.
Signature phrases
- “We invested in a $X,XXX,XXX [Tenant] in [Year/Location].”
- “Here's the good news”
- “As an LP, simply ask”
- “There's no need for surprises.”
- “Curious to learn more about how you can invest in deals like this?”
- “Stuff happens. & as a fiduciary, we need to be prepared.”
Top 3 posts, dissected
Their highest-engagement posts, broken down line by line. Steal the structure.
We invested in a $1,800,000 Starbucks in 2024. 12 months later…they vacated. Here’s the good news, SBUX is still paying rent for 8 years. How? They signed a lease through 2034. And even though SBUX no longer operates here. They’re contractually required to pay rent through 2034. That’s the power of securing leases with investment grade tenants. They have the ability to pay rent for properties they are vacating. We’re currently working on a lease buy-out with Starbucks. & simultaneously working on securing a new tenant. But in the meantime? Our investors continue to collect distributions. A major win for our investors. I’m curious to hear your thoughts on Starbucks leaving. Click on this link to set up a call: https://lnkd.in/gBv8kNTK
The hook 'We invested in a $1,800,000 Starbucks in 2024' uses a specific dollar amount and recognizable brand to create immediate visualization. The follow-up 'they vacated' introduces conflict. This is a classic setup-reversal that stops scrollers because they want to know how this ends.
The post opens with the hook, then uses a question ('How?') to create a pause and re-engage attention. It then explains the lease protection mechanism in short, punchy lines. The middle section uses bullet logic ('They have the ability to pay rent for properties they are vacating') to educate. It closes with current action ('We're currently working on a lease buy-out') and investor benefit ('Our investors continue to collect distributions'). The final line is a question that invites comment.
- Question-based re-engagement after the hook reversal
- Short declarative sentences that build tension ('Here's the good news')
- Parenthetical explanations that add credibility without breaking flow
- Investor-centric framing ('A major win for our investors')
- Open-ended closing question to drive comments
The post ends with 'I'm curious to hear your thoughts on Starbucks leaving' followed by a link to schedule a call. This dual close works because the question invites comments (driving the 46.7% conversation rate) while the link captures warm leads from engaged readers.
Use a specific dollar amount and recognizable tenant name in your hook, introduce a conflict or surprise immediately after, then resolve it with a counterintuitive fact that makes readers want to understand your process.
We bought a $3,100,000 Dollar General in 2023. We bought it in Milford, OH. Here’s a breakdown of the acquisition: 1. We acquired the property with $1,255,000 in equity. 2. We acquired the property with an LTV of 60%. ↳the loan amount was $1,860,000.00. ↳with a 6.32% intere…
The hook 'We bought a $3,100,000 Dollar General in 2023' is identical in structure to post 1 but uses a different tenant and adds geographic specificity ('Milford, OH'). The specificity makes the deal feel real and auditable, which is critical for accredited investors evaluating whether to trust the sponsor.
After the hook, the post immediately pivots to a numbered financial breakdown. Each line item is a single fact (acquisition equity, LTV, interest rate, annual rent, debt service, cash flow, monthly distribution). This creates a scannable, reference-able format. The post then calculates the cash-on-cash return explicitly ('$176,800 / $1,860,000 = 14.09%'). The close emphasizes monthly distributions and includes a CTA to schedule a call.
- Numbered list with financial specificity (LTV, interest rate, debt service)
- Explicit math shown (not hidden) to build trust
- Emphasis on recurring distributions ('every. single. month.')
- Geographic specificity to prove real deals
- Direct CTA that mirrors the investor's next logical step
The close is 'Curious to learn more about how you can invest in deals like this? Click the link in my bio to schedule an intro call.' This works because it acknowledges the reader's likely next question and removes friction by directing them to a specific action.
When teaching financial concepts, show the math explicitly and break it into numbered components so readers can reference and share the post as an educational asset, not just inspiration.
I’ve invested in a $2,470,000 Starbucks in Oklahoma. I’ve invested in a $2,400,000 Sherwin Williams in AR. I’ve invested in a $1,800,000 Starbucks in Oklahoma. We invested in each of these properties with our own capital, passive investor capital, and lending relationships. …
The hook stacks three properties ('I've invested in a $2,470,000 Starbucks in Oklahoma. I've invested in a $2,400,000 Sherwin Williams in AR. I've invested in a $1,800,000 Starbucks in Oklahoma.') to establish pattern and proof of concept. This is different from posts 1 and 2 because it's not a single deal breakdown but a portfolio proof point that leads into educational content.
The post opens with the three-property stack, then transitions to 'Here's 2 tips to know if you want to invest in retail real estate investments.' Each tip is numbered and includes sub-bullets that explain the concept, provide examples of what went wrong, and end with an actionable question for LPs to ask sponsors. Tip 1 focuses on repurposing plans and contingency (Rite Aids, CVS, Walgreens failures). Tip 2 focuses on lease structure literacy (NNN vs. NN leases). The close is a question: 'Which tip was most helpful to you?'
- Multi-property stack to establish credibility before teaching
- Numbered tips with sub-bullets for scannability
- Real failure examples (Rite Aids, CVS, Walgreens) to build trust through transparency
- Fiduciary language ('As an LP, simply ask') to position the reader as an informed decision-maker
- Closing question that invites comment without a hard CTA
The close is a soft question ('Which tip was most helpful to you?') rather than a link. This works for this post because the goal is to drive comments and establish Zane as an educator, not immediately convert to a call. The comments become social proof that attracts other readers.
Use a portfolio proof point to establish credibility, then teach one or two actionable concepts that help your audience ask better questions of other sponsors, positioning yourself as a trusted advisor rather than a salesperson.
What drives their engagement
Zane's posts drive comments by ending with questions that invite the reader's perspective or experience ('I'm curious to hear your thoughts on Starbucks leaving' or 'Which tip was most helpful to you?'). The questions feel genuine because they're grounded in real deal complexity, not generic engagement bait. Readers comment because they want to share their own tenant horror stories or ask clarifying questions about lease structures.
Reposts are extremely low (0.1% rate), which suggests Zane's content is not designed for viral reach but for direct lead generation. The specificity of his deals and the accredited-investor-only positioning make reposts less valuable than comments and DMs. His audience reposts rarely because the content is too niche and sponsor-specific to feel broadly shareable.
High savability is likely (though not explicitly measured). Posts with numbered financial breakdowns, lease structure education, and explicit math are reference-able assets that readers bookmark for later study or to share with their accountants and attorneys. The 'Deal Breakdown' pillar especially drives saves because readers use these posts as templates for evaluating other deals.
Content pillars
Deal Breakdown + Financial Transparency
35%Zane posts actual acquisitions with LTV, debt service, cash-on-cash returns, and monthly distributions to show investors exactly what they're buying into.
Risk Mitigation & Tenant Contingency
28%He teaches LPs how to evaluate lease structures, repurposing plans, and what happens when anchor tenants vacate or don't renew.
Personal Authority & Origin Story
18%Posts about his journey from professional hockey to $200M AUM to establish credibility and relatability with high-net-worth individuals considering their next chapter.
Real Estate vs. Alternative Investments
19%Contrasts real estate cash flow, tax benefits, and volatility against stocks and W2 income to position CRE as the solution for time-poor, high-earning professionals.
Hook patterns
Specific Dollar Amount + Tenant Name
We invested in a $[X million] [Brand Name] in [Year/Location].
“We invested in a $1,800,000 Starbucks in 2024.”
→ Concrete numbers and recognizable brands stop the scroll because readers immediately visualize a real deal and want to know the outcome.
Outcome Reversal After Time Jump
[Positive setup]. [Time period] later…[unexpected negative]. Here's the good news, [redemptive fact].
“We invested in a $1,800,000 Starbucks in 2024. 12 months later…they vacated. Here's the good news, SBUX is still paying rent for 8 years.”
→ The tension between loss and recovery creates curiosity and validates the fiduciary mindset, making readers want to understand the protection mechanism.
Statistic Shock (High Income + Constraint)
I spoke with a [high-earning professional] who makes $[X]/year. [Constraint that money doesn't solve].
“I spoke with an attorney who makes $350,000/year. He's billed 60-70 hour weeks for the last 15 years. & he sees no end in sight.”
→ High earners recognize themselves in the story and feel the pain of time poverty, which makes the CRE solution feel personally relevant.
Age Milestone + Pivot Moment
[Age]: [Dream/Status]. [Age]: [Forced decision]. [Age]: [New achievement]. [Age]: [Aspirational statement].
“23 years old: Playing professional hockey. 25 years old: Was forced to quit that dream. 28 years old: Started my own real estate investment firm. 32 years old: Own $200,000,000 worth of real estate.”
→ The vertical timeline creates narrative momentum and shows compounding results, which resonates with ambitious professionals considering a pivot.
Multi-Property Stack (Proof of Thesis)
I've invested in a $[X] [Tenant] in [Location]. I've invested in a $[X] [Tenant] in [Location]. [Pattern observation].
“I've invested in a $2,470,000 Starbucks in Oklahoma. I've invested in a $2,400,000 Sherwin Williams in AR. I've invested in a $1,800,000 Starbucks in Oklahoma.”
→ Repetition of similar deals with different outcomes proves the thesis is repeatable and builds pattern recognition for the reader.
Fiduciary Accountability Statement
Stuff happens. & as a fiduciary, we need to be prepared. [Example of what happened]. [How we prepared].
“Stuff happens. & as a fiduciary, we need to be prepared. We've had Rite Aids go out of business. We've had CVS not renew their leases. & we've been prepared for each.”
→ The word 'fiduciary' signals legal responsibility and trustworthiness, while the examples prove competence through adversity.
Top-performing hooks
“We invested in a $1,800,000 Starbucks in 2024.”
“We bought a $3,100,000 Dollar General in 2023.”
“I’ve invested in a $2,470,000 Starbucks in Oklahoma.”
→ The post establishes credibility through specific investment examples upfront, then delivers actionable, practical tips that address real pain points for passive investors (tenant risk and lease oblig
“23 years old: Playing professional hockey.”
“I spoke with an attorney who makes $350,000/year.”
“I invested in a $1,100,000 Dollar General in 2022.”
“I spoke with a doctor who makes over $500,000 a year.”
“I invested in a $1,250,000 Dollar General in 2020.”
→ The post combines specific financial metrics with a tangible success story that builds credibility while the clear CTA ('DM Cash flow') creates a direct conversion pathway for qualified investors inte
“We acquired this $415,000 O’Reilly Auto in 2024.”
“Ray Kroc bought McDonalds for $2,700,000.”
What works
- Specific dollar amounts + recognizable tenant names in hooks (top 5 posts all use this pattern). The $1.8M Starbucks hook generated 553 engagement because readers immediately visualize a real deal and want to know the outcome.
- Outcome reversals that introduce conflict then resolve it with a counterintuitive fact ('12 months later…they vacated. Here's the good news, SBUX is still paying rent for 8 years.'). This pattern appears in the #1 and #2 posts and drives high comment rates because readers want to understand the protection mechanism.
- Explicit financial math shown in the post (not hidden behind a link). Post #2 shows the cash-on-cash calculation ($176,800 / $1,860,000 = 14.09%) inline, which builds trust and makes the post shareable as an educational reference.
- Fiduciary language and contingency planning ('Stuff happens. & as a fiduciary, we need to be prepared.'). This phrase appears in post #3 and signals trustworthiness to accredited investors who are evaluating whether to trust a sponsor with their capital.
- Questions at the close that invite reader perspective rather than hard CTAs. Posts #1 and #3 end with genuine questions ('I'm curious to hear your thoughts' and 'Which tip was most helpful to you?'), which drive comments and create social proof.
- Multi-property stacks that prove repeatable thesis before teaching. Post #3 opens with three different deals to establish pattern recognition, then teaches two actionable tips. This structure positions Zane as someone who has done this multiple times, not once.
Steal this for your own LinkedIn
- Start your next post with a specific dollar amount and a recognizable brand or company name. Instead of 'We invested in a retail property,' write 'We invested in a $2.1M CVS in Nashville.' The specificity stops the scroll.
- Introduce a conflict or surprise immediately after your hook. Don't bury the tension. Use 'Here's the good news' or a similar phrase to signal that you're about to resolve the conflict with a counterintuitive fact.
- Show your math explicitly in the post. If you're teaching a financial concept, calculate it inline so readers can follow your logic and reference it later. Don't make them click a link or guess at your methodology.
- End with a genuine question that invites your reader's perspective or experience, not a generic CTA. Instead of 'Schedule a call,' ask 'What's your biggest concern when evaluating a single-tenant deal?' This drives comments and builds community.
- Use fiduciary language and contingency examples to build trust. Mention specific failures you've prepared for ('We've had Rite Aids go out of business. We've had CVS not renew their leases. & we've been prepared for each.'). This signals competence through adversity.
- Post consistently at the same time on the same day of the week. Zane posts 5.7 times per week on Wednesdays at 8 PM UTC. Pick a rhythm you can sustain and stick to it so your audience knows when to expect you.
Compare Zane with…
Get the full Zane Schartz playbook
Hook templates, content calendar, posting cadence, and the exact frameworks they use - delivered to your inbox.
Posting patterns
Zane posts 5.7 times per week (74 posts in 13 weeks), which is consistent daily-to-near-daily cadence that keeps him visible in his audience's feed without appearing spammy.
Posts perform best on Wednesdays at 8 PM UTC, which is likely 3 PM or 4 PM ET. This timing catches the end-of-workday scroll when accredited investors are winding down and checking LinkedIn before leaving the office.
Medium-length posts (80-180 words) perform best with 320 avg engagement, followed closely by long posts (180-350 words at 301 avg engagement). Short posts (30-80 words) underperform at 131 avg engagement. The sweet spot is 100-200 words: long enough to include specifics and education but short enough to read in a single scroll without clicking 'more'.
Engagement by day
Content mix
avg 333 engagements per post
avg 298 engagements per post
avg 296 engagements per post
Zane's mix of deal breakdowns (35%), risk mitigation education (28%), personal authority (18%), and alternative investment comparisons (19%) works because his audience is accredited investors who need both proof of competence and education on how to evaluate sponsors. The deal breakdowns build credibility through transparency. The risk mitigation content positions him as a fiduciary who has thought through contingencies. The personal authority posts (hockey to $200M AUM) establish relatability with high-net-worth individuals considering a pivot. The alternative investment comparisons justify why CRE is the right choice for time-poor, high-earning professionals. Together, these pillars create a complete case for why someone should invest with Zane's firm.
