My thinking is FSD just used the 6.2% as a value to show an example of where and when the crossing point would be. Take the graph as an example of how to do the analysis, use whatever numbers you like. It is clear that real estate won’t appreciate forever. There was a simple question posed and FSD was trying to answer it using a set of assumptions that he selected without any input from the board. I would figure 6.2% was selected because that may have been a valid appreciation rate for that time period for that particular region.
