FHA loans; why not?

[scaredyclassic]

what about if you buy down the interest rate on the FHA?

also, should the 80k be credited to the 20% scenario. maybe that’s where I’m confused. it doesn’t seem right. if I start off with 80k i could hold on to it, or ut it in the house. why not add my 80 k plus interest back on to the fha costs?

[an]

[quote=scaredycat]what about if you buy down the interest rate on the FHA?

also, should the 80k be credited to the 20% scenario. maybe that’s where I’m confused. it doesn’t seem right. if I start off with 80k i could hold on to it, or ut it in the house. why not add my 80 k plus interest back on to the fha costs?[/quote]
You can buy down rate with both FHA and conventional, so I’m not sure if there’s any difference.

The reason why I didn’t add the 80k to the FHA side is because I subtract 80k on the conventional side.

[an]

[quote=scaredycat]what about if you buy down the interest rate on the FHA?

also, should the 80k be credited to the 20% scenario. maybe that’s where I’m confused. it doesn’t seem right. if I start off with 80k i could hold on to it, or ut it in the house. why not add my 80 k plus interest back on to the fha costs?[/quote]
You can buy down rate with both FHA and conventional, so I’m not sure if there’s any difference.

The reason why I didn’t add the 80k to the FHA side is because I subtract 80k on the conventional side.

[an]

[quote=scaredycat]what about if you buy down the interest rate on the FHA?

also, should the 80k be credited to the 20% scenario. maybe that’s where I’m confused. it doesn’t seem right. if I start off with 80k i could hold on to it, or ut it in the house. why not add my 80 k plus interest back on to the fha costs?[/quote]
You can buy down rate with both FHA and conventional, so I’m not sure if there’s any difference.

The reason why I didn’t add the 80k to the FHA side is because I subtract 80k on the conventional side.

[an]

[quote=scaredycat]what about if you buy down the interest rate on the FHA?

also, should the 80k be credited to the 20% scenario. maybe that’s where I’m confused. it doesn’t seem right. if I start off with 80k i could hold on to it, or ut it in the house. why not add my 80 k plus interest back on to the fha costs?[/quote]
You can buy down rate with both FHA and conventional, so I’m not sure if there’s any difference.

The reason why I didn’t add the 80k to the FHA side is because I subtract 80k on the conventional side.

[an]

[quote=scaredycat]what about if you buy down the interest rate on the FHA?

also, should the 80k be credited to the 20% scenario. maybe that’s where I’m confused. it doesn’t seem right. if I start off with 80k i could hold on to it, or ut it in the house. why not add my 80 k plus interest back on to the fha costs?[/quote]
You can buy down rate with both FHA and conventional, so I’m not sure if there’s any difference.

The reason why I didn’t add the 80k to the FHA side is because I subtract 80k on the conventional side.

[scaredyclassic]

I still don’t think you ahve it right. the 80k isn’t being “subtracted”, it’s being added in to make it look cheaper on the 20% up scenarios.

you wrote:

20% increase over 8 years:
$113,342.30 (8 years of interest) – $206907.76(equity) – 80k (down payment) = -$173565.46 (total cost of living in it for 8 years)

shouldn’t this be 207k – 113k = up 93,000 the 80 k isn’t profit to bring it up to 173k, it’s just money you put in that was there at the end of the transaction. kind of like if you’d left it in the bank. actually you’re only up 93,000.

[scaredyclassic]

I still don’t think you ahve it right. the 80k isn’t being “subtracted”, it’s being added in to make it look cheaper on the 20% up scenarios.

you wrote:

20% increase over 8 years:
$113,342.30 (8 years of interest) – $206907.76(equity) – 80k (down payment) = -$173565.46 (total cost of living in it for 8 years)

shouldn’t this be 207k – 113k = up 93,000 the 80 k isn’t profit to bring it up to 173k, it’s just money you put in that was there at the end of the transaction. kind of like if you’d left it in the bank. actually you’re only up 93,000.

[scaredyclassic]

I still don’t think you ahve it right. the 80k isn’t being “subtracted”, it’s being added in to make it look cheaper on the 20% up scenarios.

you wrote:

20% increase over 8 years:
$113,342.30 (8 years of interest) – $206907.76(equity) – 80k (down payment) = -$173565.46 (total cost of living in it for 8 years)

shouldn’t this be 207k – 113k = up 93,000 the 80 k isn’t profit to bring it up to 173k, it’s just money you put in that was there at the end of the transaction. kind of like if you’d left it in the bank. actually you’re only up 93,000.

[scaredyclassic]

I still don’t think you ahve it right. the 80k isn’t being “subtracted”, it’s being added in to make it look cheaper on the 20% up scenarios.

you wrote:

20% increase over 8 years:
$113,342.30 (8 years of interest) – $206907.76(equity) – 80k (down payment) = -$173565.46 (total cost of living in it for 8 years)

shouldn’t this be 207k – 113k = up 93,000 the 80 k isn’t profit to bring it up to 173k, it’s just money you put in that was there at the end of the transaction. kind of like if you’d left it in the bank. actually you’re only up 93,000.

[scaredyclassic]

I still don’t think you ahve it right. the 80k isn’t being “subtracted”, it’s being added in to make it look cheaper on the 20% up scenarios.

you wrote:

20% increase over 8 years:
$113,342.30 (8 years of interest) – $206907.76(equity) – 80k (down payment) = -$173565.46 (total cost of living in it for 8 years)

shouldn’t this be 207k – 113k = up 93,000 the 80 k isn’t profit to bring it up to 173k, it’s just money you put in that was there at the end of the transaction. kind of like if you’d left it in the bank. actually you’re only up 93,000.

[scaredyclassic]

if im right on that, the numbers look more reaosnable to me. thenby putting 80k into the deal, you got a return on your 80k of 93k, about 110% over 8 years. Not bad but not as big as your numbers looked. so. what’s more likely to happen. a 20% rise in housing or a doubling of gold over the next 8 years?

also same logic applies to your flat 20% scenario, you’re not “subtracting the 20% you’re using it to make it seem like it was cheaper to live int he house than it was. it’s being show as a profit, the ‘negaitve” number isn’t a loss, it’s a “negative cost” of lviing there…

is there amortgage broker out there who can deftly set me straight? i really don’t know if im right

[scaredyclassic]

if im right on that, the numbers look more reaosnable to me. thenby putting 80k into the deal, you got a return on your 80k of 93k, about 110% over 8 years. Not bad but not as big as your numbers looked. so. what’s more likely to happen. a 20% rise in housing or a doubling of gold over the next 8 years?

also same logic applies to your flat 20% scenario, you’re not “subtracting the 20% you’re using it to make it seem like it was cheaper to live int he house than it was. it’s being show as a profit, the ‘negaitve” number isn’t a loss, it’s a “negative cost” of lviing there…

is there amortgage broker out there who can deftly set me straight? i really don’t know if im right

[scaredyclassic]

if im right on that, the numbers look more reaosnable to me. thenby putting 80k into the deal, you got a return on your 80k of 93k, about 110% over 8 years. Not bad but not as big as your numbers looked. so. what’s more likely to happen. a 20% rise in housing or a doubling of gold over the next 8 years?

also same logic applies to your flat 20% scenario, you’re not “subtracting the 20% you’re using it to make it seem like it was cheaper to live int he house than it was. it’s being show as a profit, the ‘negaitve” number isn’t a loss, it’s a “negative cost” of lviing there…

is there amortgage broker out there who can deftly set me straight? i really don’t know if im right

[scaredyclassic]

if im right on that, the numbers look more reaosnable to me. thenby putting 80k into the deal, you got a return on your 80k of 93k, about 110% over 8 years. Not bad but not as big as your numbers looked. so. what’s more likely to happen. a 20% rise in housing or a doubling of gold over the next 8 years?

also same logic applies to your flat 20% scenario, you’re not “subtracting the 20% you’re using it to make it seem like it was cheaper to live int he house than it was. it’s being show as a profit, the ‘negaitve” number isn’t a loss, it’s a “negative cost” of lviing there…

is there amortgage broker out there who can deftly set me straight? i really don’t know if im right

[Author]

Posts