Home › Forums › Closed Forums › Buying and Selling RE › additional 0.75% for condos?
- This topic has 50 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 7 months ago by
4plexowner.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 26, 2009 at 2:16 PM #15557April 26, 2009 at 2:35 PM #387587
patientrenter
Participantveees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?
If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?
April 26, 2009 at 2:35 PM #387857Participantveees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?
If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?
April 26, 2009 at 2:35 PM #388250Participantveees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?
If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?
April 26, 2009 at 2:35 PM #388111Participantveees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?
If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?
April 26, 2009 at 2:35 PM #388057Participantveees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?
If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?
April 26, 2009 at 5:41 PM #388292urbanrealtor
Participant[quote=patientrenter]veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?
If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?[/quote]
Very well put.
At a conceptual level, the GSE’s (like Fannie) have the right to design their own underwriting standards.
I don’t think that protecting themselves more is a bad idea. This makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.
My 2 bits.
April 26, 2009 at 5:41 PM #388151Participant[quote=patientrenter]veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?
If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?[/quote]
Very well put.
At a conceptual level, the GSE’s (like Fannie) have the right to design their own underwriting standards.
I don’t think that protecting themselves more is a bad idea. This makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.
My 2 bits.
April 26, 2009 at 5:41 PM #388099Participant[quote=patientrenter]veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?
If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?[/quote]
Very well put.
At a conceptual level, the GSE’s (like Fannie) have the right to design their own underwriting standards.
I don’t think that protecting themselves more is a bad idea. This makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.
My 2 bits.
April 26, 2009 at 5:41 PM #387899Participant[quote=patientrenter]veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?
If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?[/quote]
Very well put.
At a conceptual level, the GSE’s (like Fannie) have the right to design their own underwriting standards.
I don’t think that protecting themselves more is a bad idea. This makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.
My 2 bits.
April 26, 2009 at 5:41 PM #387630Participant[quote=patientrenter]veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?
If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?[/quote]
Very well put.
At a conceptual level, the GSE’s (like Fannie) have the right to design their own underwriting standards.
I don’t think that protecting themselves more is a bad idea. This makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.
My 2 bits.
April 26, 2009 at 10:37 PM #388604
barnaby33ParticipantThis makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.
Oh its too late for that. Where is that lovely updated credit suisse chart when you need it. Probably one google search away, except I’m drunk and lazy.
JoshApril 26, 2009 at 10:37 PM #387946barnaby33ParticipantThis makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.
Oh its too late for that. Where is that lovely updated credit suisse chart when you need it. Probably one google search away, except I’m drunk and lazy.
JoshApril 26, 2009 at 10:37 PM #388214barnaby33ParticipantThis makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.
Oh its too late for that. Where is that lovely updated credit suisse chart when you need it. Probably one google search away, except I’m drunk and lazy.
JoshApril 26, 2009 at 10:37 PM #388466barnaby33ParticipantThis makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.
Oh its too late for that. Where is that lovely updated credit suisse chart when you need it. Probably one google search away, except I’m drunk and lazy.
Josh -
AuthorPosts
- The forum ‘Buying and Selling RE’ is closed to new topics and replies.