Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
(former)FormerSanDiegan
ParticipantA patent would only protect the holder’s rights. It can’t force a market place to use it.
The little guy has a huge hurdle due to the vested interest and large $ amounts involved.
As an example look at the FSO market.
But, the good news is that the current model seems to have some inefficiencies. Where there is inefficiency there is room for removing these inefficiencies and taking a small delta in profit. A well-capitalized entity has a better change of exploiting those inefficiencies and eventially profiting, assuming they can absorb any hurdles to start-up costs.
Companies like Redfin and Ziprealty are incremental examples. They essentially are turning some of the profit over to the buyer in exchange for giving fewer services and having the buyer doing some of the leg work. It’s a small change, and may or may not stick, but it’s a step.
Participant[quote=walterwhite]and what is this”it’s the same as rent” thing? that statement is meaningless without determining what the down payment is. I mean, yoou could have bought the finest house in La Jolla at the peak of the bubble for same as rent. you just ahd to put 90% down. Sure, if I put a huge amount of money at risk, i can get it same as rent. but, yeah, with 20% down, it’s cheaper than renting that same place. If you could rent it. It’s almost too nice to be a rental. it would be a high end premium fancy rental.[/quote]
FWIW, I assumed it was for 10-20% down, when I posed the question.
But, your point is taken. A refinement for what was my simple point: If for $X down you can finance for ~ same as rent. Then in 30 years you will have essentially bought the house for the $X down (in 2010 dollars).
Participant[quote=walterwhite]and what is this”it’s the same as rent” thing? that statement is meaningless without determining what the down payment is. I mean, yoou could have bought the finest house in La Jolla at the peak of the bubble for same as rent. you just ahd to put 90% down. Sure, if I put a huge amount of money at risk, i can get it same as rent. but, yeah, with 20% down, it’s cheaper than renting that same place. If you could rent it. It’s almost too nice to be a rental. it would be a high end premium fancy rental.[/quote]
FWIW, I assumed it was for 10-20% down, when I posed the question.
But, your point is taken. A refinement for what was my simple point: If for $X down you can finance for ~ same as rent. Then in 30 years you will have essentially bought the house for the $X down (in 2010 dollars).
Participant[quote=walterwhite]and what is this”it’s the same as rent” thing? that statement is meaningless without determining what the down payment is. I mean, yoou could have bought the finest house in La Jolla at the peak of the bubble for same as rent. you just ahd to put 90% down. Sure, if I put a huge amount of money at risk, i can get it same as rent. but, yeah, with 20% down, it’s cheaper than renting that same place. If you could rent it. It’s almost too nice to be a rental. it would be a high end premium fancy rental.[/quote]
FWIW, I assumed it was for 10-20% down, when I posed the question.
But, your point is taken. A refinement for what was my simple point: If for $X down you can finance for ~ same as rent. Then in 30 years you will have essentially bought the house for the $X down (in 2010 dollars).
Participant[quote=walterwhite]and what is this”it’s the same as rent” thing? that statement is meaningless without determining what the down payment is. I mean, yoou could have bought the finest house in La Jolla at the peak of the bubble for same as rent. you just ahd to put 90% down. Sure, if I put a huge amount of money at risk, i can get it same as rent. but, yeah, with 20% down, it’s cheaper than renting that same place. If you could rent it. It’s almost too nice to be a rental. it would be a high end premium fancy rental.[/quote]
FWIW, I assumed it was for 10-20% down, when I posed the question.
But, your point is taken. A refinement for what was my simple point: If for $X down you can finance for ~ same as rent. Then in 30 years you will have essentially bought the house for the $X down (in 2010 dollars).
Participant[quote=walterwhite]and what is this”it’s the same as rent” thing? that statement is meaningless without determining what the down payment is. I mean, yoou could have bought the finest house in La Jolla at the peak of the bubble for same as rent. you just ahd to put 90% down. Sure, if I put a huge amount of money at risk, i can get it same as rent. but, yeah, with 20% down, it’s cheaper than renting that same place. If you could rent it. It’s almost too nice to be a rental. it would be a high end premium fancy rental.[/quote]
FWIW, I assumed it was for 10-20% down, when I posed the question.
But, your point is taken. A refinement for what was my simple point: If for $X down you can finance for ~ same as rent. Then in 30 years you will have essentially bought the house for the $X down (in 2010 dollars).
Participant[quote=walterwhite]no it’s not, because $12,000 today is worth a lot less than 12,000 financed at 4 % for 30 years. Plus, I have the 12,000 right now. It’s difficult to pry it from my sweaty hands’ death grip. The 12,000 in the future is far more abstract[/quote]
Financing 12K @ 4% will cost you $20,624.26 over the life of the loan.
The amount in question is roughly equivalent to about 3/16% rate difference on your loan (assuming 500K loan range).
Rates move by 1/8 point randomly. Personally I would sacrifice 2% on price to have more control over my loan on 80% of the purchase price. Just my advice.
Participant[quote=walterwhite]no it’s not, because $12,000 today is worth a lot less than 12,000 financed at 4 % for 30 years. Plus, I have the 12,000 right now. It’s difficult to pry it from my sweaty hands’ death grip. The 12,000 in the future is far more abstract[/quote]
Financing 12K @ 4% will cost you $20,624.26 over the life of the loan.
The amount in question is roughly equivalent to about 3/16% rate difference on your loan (assuming 500K loan range).
Rates move by 1/8 point randomly. Personally I would sacrifice 2% on price to have more control over my loan on 80% of the purchase price. Just my advice.
Participant[quote=walterwhite]no it’s not, because $12,000 today is worth a lot less than 12,000 financed at 4 % for 30 years. Plus, I have the 12,000 right now. It’s difficult to pry it from my sweaty hands’ death grip. The 12,000 in the future is far more abstract[/quote]
Financing 12K @ 4% will cost you $20,624.26 over the life of the loan.
The amount in question is roughly equivalent to about 3/16% rate difference on your loan (assuming 500K loan range).
Rates move by 1/8 point randomly. Personally I would sacrifice 2% on price to have more control over my loan on 80% of the purchase price. Just my advice.
Participant[quote=walterwhite]no it’s not, because $12,000 today is worth a lot less than 12,000 financed at 4 % for 30 years. Plus, I have the 12,000 right now. It’s difficult to pry it from my sweaty hands’ death grip. The 12,000 in the future is far more abstract[/quote]
Financing 12K @ 4% will cost you $20,624.26 over the life of the loan.
The amount in question is roughly equivalent to about 3/16% rate difference on your loan (assuming 500K loan range).
Rates move by 1/8 point randomly. Personally I would sacrifice 2% on price to have more control over my loan on 80% of the purchase price. Just my advice.
Participant[quote=walterwhite]no it’s not, because $12,000 today is worth a lot less than 12,000 financed at 4 % for 30 years. Plus, I have the 12,000 right now. It’s difficult to pry it from my sweaty hands’ death grip. The 12,000 in the future is far more abstract[/quote]
Financing 12K @ 4% will cost you $20,624.26 over the life of the loan.
The amount in question is roughly equivalent to about 3/16% rate difference on your loan (assuming 500K loan range).
Rates move by 1/8 point randomly. Personally I would sacrifice 2% on price to have more control over my loan on 80% of the purchase price. Just my advice.
Participant[quote=walterwhite]yeah but 2% out of pocket closing costs is a lot.[/quote]
It’s actually the same amount, it’s just your perspective that is different. Whether one overpays by 12K or pays closing costs of 12 K, or loses 12K in vegas, it’s still 12K.
Participant[quote=walterwhite]yeah but 2% out of pocket closing costs is a lot.[/quote]
It’s actually the same amount, it’s just your perspective that is different. Whether one overpays by 12K or pays closing costs of 12 K, or loses 12K in vegas, it’s still 12K.
Participant[quote=walterwhite]yeah but 2% out of pocket closing costs is a lot.[/quote]
It’s actually the same amount, it’s just your perspective that is different. Whether one overpays by 12K or pays closing costs of 12 K, or loses 12K in vegas, it’s still 12K.
-
AuthorPosts
