For cars, is it better to have one that seats 6 or that is a hybrid?
For wine, is it better to have a red or a white?
For computers, it it better to have a laptop or a desktop?
Maybe you get my point: It's not that one's better or worse than the other. The "better" solution depends on the individual buying the investment property/car/wine/computer.
Some people prefer high cash flow. Others a resale value that'll yield a profit. Different strategies.
Now, having said that, I'd personally suggest that, for many folks, high cash flow is preferable. Further, "solid resale value" is fraught with peril.
The problem with "solid resale value" is multifold. First, any investment property should have a positive cash flow. But if you put too much emphasis on equity or "solid resale value," you (or the investor) might be tempted to accept a moderate negative cash flow because of "all the equity." Bad move. Further "solid resale value" suggests you know or can predict what the resale value will be. In 2006, I knew of condos selling for $300,000. If I'd been able to sell you one at $200,000, would that have had a "solid resale value"? I guess so, until prices collapsed. You can buy those same condos today for $140,000.
Someone who buys on "solid resale value" isn't an investor. He or she is a speculator. It's OK to say that you're buying a property with $100,000 in equity. (Whether that equity remains there in 5 years is another question.) But it's not OK to say that the property has a "solid resale value."
So, given a choice, I'd suggest high cash flow. Still, it's not an "either/or" choice in many areas. Buy below market to get some built-in equity. But make sure there's decent cash flow. That way, if the value never goes up a penny--or even falls--you're doing fine. (Those $300,000 condos? At the top of the market they were renting for about $1,500. Today, they're still renting for about $1,500. Buy one today for $140,000 and you'll have nice cash flow. And who cares what happens with its resale value.)
Hope that helps.