Realtor · Boulder, CO · Member since 2016 · 3k+ posts · 5k+ votes
We haven't seen that many due on sale clauses being enforced by lenders over the past decade or so. At the same time, we're seeing some gurus selling strategies like subto as if there is no risk of triggering a DOSC. More and more investors are looking to assume low-interest loans rather than deal with reduced cashflow thanks to today's interest rates. It was before my time, but my understanding is that triggering a DOSC was more common in the 80's during a similar rising interest rate environment like we find ourselves in now. Lenders are probably more likely to enforce their right to call the loan if they feel their security is at risk in the hands of an unvetted buyer, or they believe they can make more money if the buyer applies for a new loan. It seems like it is becoming good business for lenders to start enforcing (they may actually also benefit by getting these 2-3% interest loans off their books). Are we about to see an uptick in due on sale clause enforcement? Curious to hear what some lenders and folks who have been around a minute think about this...
We have had the due on sale clause called 4 times this month... but knowing your way around it is crucial. Either A: revert to a lease option with the option price being the mortgage balance when the option is executed... or B: Use an executory contract instead of SubTo. Land Contract. Contract for Deed. Agreement for Sale etc. I talk about this on my youtube channel.
I disagree. The people doing subject-to are quite sophisticated and typically have quite the platform. Imagine Pace decides to blast a bank calling his notes due to an audience of millions on YouTube. You think that doesn’t affect the bank stock/image? You think that won’t catch a news cycle? Have you heard of GameStop? How about Reddit? How about Budweiser?
The "average" sub-to member has as much as $1,500 to their name, I don't think any bank is all to worried with a few thousand NON-mortgage holders commanding ten's of thousands in deposit dollars doing really anything. They could all disappear tomorrow putting their $ in jars and I doubt the banks would even notice.
As for stock manipulation, yeah, I feel sorry for the fool who tries nerfing a banks stock via the measure noted. That's a fast-pass too club Fed..
Sub-to is an army of poor ignorant being lead by a handful of savvy opportunists. No, not trying to insult or insinuate anything, just calling it how it is. Pace is doing great at what he does, selling hopeium like a champ, and filtering out the 1% that are actual deals to make some added returns. His REI is an after fact, the hopeium sales are primary. That's just reality of it.
That’s a bold claim to make ON the forum run by his publisher. But ok 🤷🏼♂️
Why?
Do we no longer get Freedom of Speech?
Are you concerned that said Freedom of Speech would impact book/program sales? You point out specifically "... on forum run by his publisher." Doesn't seem a great argument against the premise I posed that program sales are primary, REI is after-thought/action. Actually, seems like you AGREE with me.🤷🏼♂️
It’s not an argument against anything you said. I won’t debate our freedoms. I don’t know whether his income comes from selling hope or buying real estate.
I find it bold to call the forum you’re using a hopium peddler. Bold, nothing more and nothing less.
I disagree. The people doing subject-to are quite sophisticated and typically have quite the platform. Imagine Pace decides to blast a bank calling his notes due to an audience of millions on YouTube. You think that doesn’t affect the bank stock/image? You think that won’t catch a news cycle? Have you heard of GameStop? How about Reddit? How about Budweiser?
I guarantee it won't catch anything. People who are involved in anything tend to have an overinflated sense of self, ego and importance. Real estate investing is just one subset of any type of investing, residential (what most sub2 is) is another subset of that, and "creative" purchasing is a tiny subset of that. Don't conflate the one-off thing with Gamestop with what real investors with real money have on their radar. With all due respect, Pace is a nobody just like I'm a nobody and you're a nobody. He's probably less of a nobody than either of us, at least in terms of social media, but his 250k followers and 50k worth of views on his videos probably doesn't even place him in the top 10 thousand users. Bigger Pockets has over 1 million followers on Youtube and I guarantee if you walked out in the street tomorrow and asked the first random 100 people you saw if they knew what it was, you'd be unlikely to get even 1 correct answer.
Sub2 is a nobody in a subset of nobody in a subset of "yeah I've heard of that but I have no idea what it is".
I've been in real estate for a minute and the first time I heard of Pace was Friday night when his followers started spamming the forums with a bunch of BS. Not a great first impression.
Well Steve, I don’t know how to tell you this…but Pace had a show in A&E 2 years ago, rubs elbows with Grant Cardone, wrote a book for BP, and is all over social media. So while it may be your first impression, it’s not everyone’s.
I can summarize my entire thoughts on this with 2-words:
Here is an old thread to the guy you mentioned. Not necessarily for your benefit because you already seem to know of him. I looked him up and this popped up.
Armando had a show on A&E.
Armando rubbed elbows with em all.
Armando had a legion of "groupies" who professed his divinity.
Until....
And now, Armando has.... well from best I can tell he still has great hair. But also lawsuits up the ying-yang that appears to keep loosing. Seems to be a story of Titan too tin-cup, or on the way there.
And it's same old story. Guys get's into REI, guy does well, guy flips a switch to selling hopeium of REI fortune, everything becomes about selling programs, guy goes down in flames after masses say the hopeium is trash.
Selling "Golden Tickets" has proven a dangerous game for many through-out REI history. Kiyosaki himself couldn't pull it off. Trump tried and failed. It's a road of business littered with "celebrity" corpses.
To say someone is a "celebrity" so it must be great, I say how's your thigh-master? Aside from the George Foreman Grill (yeah, those things are awesome right) celebritism for sales is historically a rule of thumb to gauge hokum not quality.
Who knows, maybe Pace is "different", we will see. But to argue it's great BECAUSE he is a "celebrity" is childish at best.
I disagree. The people doing subject-to are quite sophisticated and typically have quite the platform. Imagine Pace decides to blast a bank calling his notes due to an audience of millions on YouTube. You think that doesn’t affect the bank stock/image? You think that won’t catch a news cycle? Have you heard of GameStop? How about Reddit? How about Budweiser?
I guarantee it won't catch anything. People who are involved in anything tend to have an overinflated sense of self, ego and importance. Real estate investing is just one subset of any type of investing, residential (what most sub2 is) is another subset of that, and "creative" purchasing is a tiny subset of that. Don't conflate the one-off thing with Gamestop with what real investors with real money have on their radar. With all due respect, Pace is a nobody just like I'm a nobody and you're a nobody. He's probably less of a nobody than either of us, at least in terms of social media, but his 250k followers and 50k worth of views on his videos probably doesn't even place him in the top 10 thousand users. Bigger Pockets has over 1 million followers on Youtube and I guarantee if you walked out in the street tomorrow and asked the first random 100 people you saw if they knew what it was, you'd be unlikely to get even 1 correct answer.
Sub2 is a nobody in a subset of nobody in a subset of "yeah I've heard of that but I have no idea what it is".
I've been in real estate for a minute and the first time I heard of Pace was Friday night when his followers started spamming the forums with a bunch of BS. Not a great first impression.
Well Steve, I don’t know how to tell you this…but Pace had a show in A&E 2 years ago, rubs elbows with Grant Cardone, wrote a book for BP, and is all over social media. So while it may be your first impression, it’s not everyone’s.
I can summarize my entire thoughts on this with 2-words:
Here is an old thread to the guy you mentioned. Not necessarily for your benefit because you already seem to know of him. I looked him up and this popped up.
Armando had a show on A&E.
Armando rubbed elbows with em all.
Armando had a legion of "groupies" who professed his divinity.
Until....
And now, Armando has.... well from best I can tell he still has great hair. But also lawsuits up the ying-yang that appears to keep loosing. Seems to be a story of Titan too tin-cup, or on the way there.
And it's same old story. Guys get's into REI, guy does well, guy flips a switch to selling hopeium of REI fortune, everything becomes about selling programs, guy goes down in flames after masses say the hopeium is trash.
Selling "Golden Tickets" has proven a dangerous game for many through-out REI history. Kiyosaki himself couldn't pull it off. Trump tried and failed. It's a road of business littered with "celebrity" corpses.
To say someone is a "celebrity" so it must be great, I say how's your thigh-master? Aside from the George Foreman Grill (yeah, those things are awesome right) celebritism for sales is historically a rule of thumb to gauge hokum not quality.
Who knows, maybe Pace is "different", we will see. But to argue it's great BECAUSE he is a "celebrity" is childish at best.
Clayton Morris is another great example: He was on a BP podcast episode, had his own show on Fox News, etc. look what happened there. BP actually helped expose him as his victims put the pieces together on here. This isn’t a guru’s youtube channel where they can curate the comments or their Facebook group that they can kick anyone out who asks the wrong questions.
The point of having the clause should be obvious. It is there to protect their interest and the minute a mortgage is in trouble, you better believe they’ll enforce it.
The difference between now and the 1980’s are vast…but the PR piece alone should be telling. Nothing screams “we are in trouble” like accelerating performing 30 year mortgages. Stock prices don’t like signs of trouble.
If the mortgage is in trouble that would trigger a foreclosure. DOS is for when the title transfers to a new owner (who has not been vetted by the bank, and without the bank's permission). Not really seeing the PR angle either, sorry. Not many people really know what subto is, and when presented with the conecpet, many think it's kind of shady. And like JD pointed out, a tiny percentage of transactions are made using seller financing, and an even smaller percentage of those are done using subject to. I don't think it would make any headlines even if all those loans were called tomorrow, and with foreclosure rates being as low as they are, the banks could probably resell those properties quickly at higher interest rates, pocket new closing costs, get low interest loans making less than inflation off the books, etc. Just food for thought here, all the hype around subto lately got me thinking, it's not even a strategy I typically employ but like to have in my back pocket in the rare case when it makes sense.
I know what the DOSC is for, and banks are more inclined to use it when payments start rolling in late.
As for the quick turn around you described…. You’re forgetting the part where the foreclosure takes 12-18 months and the bank has no payments coming in during that time. As for the PR angle…you don’t have to know what subto is. If you hear that one bank is foreclosing on a lot of people, what is your reaction going to be?
The reaction of the general public to a headline like "banks clamp down on shady investors"? Probably pretty positive. Thats how it would be spun anyway...investors are a subset of a much larger general public, and sub-to is a small niche
The point of having the clause should be obvious. It is there to protect their interest and the minute a mortgage is in trouble, you better believe they’ll enforce it.
The difference between now and the 1980’s are vast…but the PR piece alone should be telling. Nothing screams “we are in trouble” like accelerating performing 30 year mortgages. Stock prices don’t like signs of trouble.
If the mortgage is in trouble that would trigger a foreclosure. DOS is for when the title transfers to a new owner (who has not been vetted by the bank, and without the bank's permission). Not really seeing the PR angle either, sorry. Not many people really know what subto is, and when presented with the conecpet, many think it's kind of shady. And like JD pointed out, a tiny percentage of transactions are made using seller financing, and an even smaller percentage of those are done using subject to. I don't think it would make any headlines even if all those loans were called tomorrow, and with foreclosure rates being as low as they are, the banks could probably resell those properties quickly at higher interest rates, pocket new closing costs, get low interest loans making less than inflation off the books, etc. Just food for thought here, all the hype around subto lately got me thinking, it's not even a strategy I typically employ but like to have in my back pocket in the rare case when it makes sense.
I know what the DOSC is for, and banks are more inclined to use it when payments start rolling in late.
As for the quick turn around you described…. You’re forgetting the part where the foreclosure takes 12-18 months and the bank has no payments coming in during that time. As for the PR angle…you don’t have to know what subto is. If you hear that one bank is foreclosing on a lot of people, what is your reaction going to be?
The reaction of the general public to a headline like "banks clamp down on shady investors"? Probably pretty positive. Thats how it would be spun anyway...investors are a subset of a much larger general public, and sub-to is a small niche
I personally think this post is in response to Mr. Morby's zealous students and VA's spamming and cramming this down everybody's throat.
There are responsible investors that buy property Sub2. Unfortunately, this is one of the techniques that are promoted to new people with bad credit and no money.
I disagree. The people doing subject-to are quite sophisticated and typically have quite the platform. Imagine Pace decides to blast a bank calling his notes due to an audience of millions on YouTube. You think that doesn’t affect the bank stock/image? You think that won’t catch a news cycle? Have you heard of GameStop? How about Reddit? How about Budweiser?
People don't give a **** about that. You really think Wells Fargo stock goes down cause Pace Morby is mad at them for calling a note due?
You realize how out of touch this is? No one would give two *****, and if anything it'd slightly go up. The headline would read Wells Fargo penalizing bad actors in the real estate industry. But again, no one would care.
You must not read the news. That’s not how you get clicks. The headline that gets clicks goes something like “Banks get greedy. Force foreclosure on homeowner who paid on time, kick out tenants.”
Guess how worried you get when it’s your bank that’s named and that headline pops up? Imagine you’d share that article with your wife?
We live in a world where PR matters to EVERY business out there. Like it or not.
You must not read the news. That’s not how you get clicks. The headline that gets clicks goes something like “Banks get greedy. Force foreclosure on homeowner who paid on time, kick out tenants.”
Guess how worried you get when it’s your bank that’s named and that headline pops up? Imagine you’d share that article with your wife?
We live in a world where PR matters to EVERY business out there. Like it or not.
You must not read the news. That’s not how you get clicks. The headline that gets clicks goes something like “Banks get greedy. Force foreclosure on homeowner who paid on time, kick out tenants.”
Guess how worried you get when it’s your bank that’s named and that headline pops up? Imagine you’d share that article with your wife?
We live in a world where PR matters to EVERY business out there. Like it or not.
Couldn't you also see the headlines reading more like "Foreclosures on the Rise as Banks Crack Down on Predatory Investors". That's more like how they usually read these days, isn't it?
You must not read the news. That’s not how you get clicks. The headline that gets clicks goes something like “Banks get greedy. Force foreclosure on homeowner who paid on time, kick out tenants.”
Guess how worried you get when it’s your bank that’s named and that headline pops up? Imagine you’d share that article with your wife?
We live in a world where PR matters to EVERY business out there. Like it or not.
Couldn't you also see the headlines reading more like "Foreclosures on the Rise as Banks Crack Down on Predatory Investors". That's more like how they usually read these days, isn't it?
Sure, but if I’m writing the story for clicks, I’m using my headline.
Honestly, if the insurance remains in place I have no idea how they would easily be able to do this nationally.
Utah for example is a non-disclosure state and the county records in 90% of the state are about as old as the time of Noah. It is hard enough to pull PRs in some areas. I imagine a lot of areas maybe not the majority but a lot are in this same bucket.
But like @Pace Jordan Morby mentioned the beauty of real estate is that there are multiple layers dealing in the buddle of rights and ownership so investors will find a way.
Honestly, if the insurance remains in place I have no idea how they would easily be able to do this nationally.
Utah for example is a non-disclosure state and the county records in 90% of the state are about as old as the time of Noah. It is hard enough to pull PRs in some areas. I imagine a lot of areas maybe not the majority but a lot are in this same bucket.
But like @Pace Jordan Morby mentioned the beauty of real estate is that there are multiple layers dealing in the buddle of rights and ownership so investors will find a way.
Unfortunately what Pace mentioned in his comment is not accurate (he said to use “an executory contract instead of SubTo. Land Contract. Contract for Deed. Agreement for Sale, etc”. However while this may sound good to someone who doesn’t know any better, none of those things actually prevent a DOS (see the link to definitions I followed up with above). The only one that would actually work in preventing DOS is reverting to a lease option, but of course a lease option is very different and much less desirable for the buyer because it doesn’t have the main advantages that subto does, (the title remains in the sellers name and any judgements, liens etc. Caused by the seller can still be attached to the property, the buyer doesn’t get to keep the sellers interest rate when they execute the lease option, they have to pay full closing costs and get the new rate, etc. so it’s apples to oranges compared to a subto structure). If there are ways to “mitigate all risk” as another Pace follower claimed in the other thread, and “investors will find a way” as you say, then how exactly?
We haven't seen that many due on sale clauses being enforced by lenders over the past decade or so. At the same time, we're seeing some gurus selling strategies like subto as if there is no risk of triggering a DOSC. More and more investors are looking to assume low-interest loans rather than deal with reduced cashflow thanks to today's interest rates. It was before my time, but my understanding is that triggering a DOSC was more common in the 80's during a similar rising interest rate environment like we find ourselves in now. Lenders are probably more likely to enforce their right to call the loan if they feel their security is at risk in the hands of an unvetted buyer, or they believe they can make more money if the buyer applies for a new loan. It seems like it is becoming good business for lenders to start enforcing (they may actually also benefit by getting these 2-3% interest loans off their books). Are we about to see an uptick in due on sale clause enforcement? Curious to hear what some lenders and folks who have been around a minute think about this...
First of all Steve is correct when he said "lenders are looking for Security, and watching for the unvetted buyer"
Also, I am involved in many Subject to's all over the Country. If anyone is concerned about the Due on Sale because of interest rates being higher, look who owns the loan and who the servicer is, I hear often people saying that the Bank will call low interest loans just to get a higher interest, the money from the mortgage is from a hedge fund or a Government back mortgage (gets deeper but just as an example), I would never see any other money provider just targeting Subject to's for the sake of the deed changing names.
If someone is concerned about the DOS Clause then they need to convert that energy into education. I know a ton of investors how own over a 100 Sub to's and the last thing on their mind is the DOS clause because they know what they are doing and they are making sure every deal is done right.
I have heard several horror stories over the years, but when it comes down to it, it is because the investor, original mortgage holder (seller) or secondary servicer (on a wrap) screwed up and did not communicate with someone, did not do their insurance correct, did not educate or disclose to the seller or did not make their mortgage payment on time.
In this business the bests defense is a great offence. There is no shortage of people getting into Sub to's that do not know how or trying to make a buck without knowing the risk.
If you worked for a servicer (Wells Fargo, Chase etc.) which all they do is collect funds and do not own the loan, and you went to your boss and said I am going to foreclose on these preforming loans because the deed changed names, I would guess you would no longer work for the Servicer any longer, remember the person who invest in the hedge funds is just looking for a long term return on their investment they can care less who is making the payment, just want the payment to be preforming.
But if the uneducated investor did not do your insurance correct, or did not work with the seller to make sure they are not the one who the Servicer calls with questions or the seller is lead to believe his or her name will be off the loan, or the investor just does not respond to any question the servicer has, all can go bad in a hurry.
I talk to Servicers often, they are just looking for comfort and communication.
I have talked to a few Hedge fund managers who like the concept of the Sub to, makes their product more investment worthy to not have a bunch of non preforming loans to report.
You must not read the news. That’s not how you get clicks. The headline that gets clicks goes something like “Banks get greedy. Force foreclosure on homeowner who paid on time, kick out tenants.”
Guess how worried you get when it’s your bank that’s named and that headline pops up? Imagine you’d share that article with your wife?
We live in a world where PR matters to EVERY business out there. Like it or not.
Couldn't you also see the headlines reading more like "Foreclosures on the Rise as Banks Crack Down on Predatory Investors". That's more like how they usually read these days, isn't it?
Sure, but if I’m writing the story for clicks, I’m using my headline.
The idea of a bunch of top bank execs sitting in a boardroom discussing policy, and making their decision out of fear of backlash from a handful of people in a Facebook group or a theoretical future blurb in the news, is ridiculous.
@David M. unless it is with a portfolio lender which most credit unions and many local banks are. The credit Union my primary home mortgage is through keeps all their mortgages on their books so they would probably be more inclined than others to call it. That being said, what you said makes sense and you have a good point.
Honestly, if the insurance remains in place I have no idea how they would easily be able to do this nationally.
Utah for example is a non-disclosure state and the county records in 90% of the state are about as old as the time of Noah. It is hard enough to pull PRs in some areas. I imagine a lot of areas maybe not the majority but a lot are in this same bucket.
But like @Pace Jordan Morby mentioned the beauty of real estate is that there are multiple layers dealing in the buddle of rights and ownership so investors will find a way.
do keep in mind there are firms that their entire business is to track mortgages like an actuary and rate them to give the servicers and the banks a read on how many loans could be in trouble when they could be in trouble and how much reserves they need. Lenders are always doing this and are doing it a lot right now as lending tightens and reserves are being bolstered for what many think is going to be a real estate recession. Find information on transfers is kids play for any of these companies. Just have to subscribe to Property Radar for one they track pretty much nationwide. If the banks / note holders want to concentrate on transfers they can do it with ease. And if we start seeing a lot of forclosure action from failed sub too buyers this will hit their radars..
@David M. unless it is with a portfolio lender which most credit unions and many local banks are. The credit Union my primary home mortgage is through keeps all their mortgages on their books so they would probably be more inclined than others to call it. That being said, what you said makes sense and you have a good point.
I'm not sure if I put in in this thread (and its too long to search), but do people realize that even their commercial loans like the 30yr term and amortization loans, and similar, have a secondary market? I've already noticed that some the lenders recs passed around are actually owned by REITs. The investment side of the REIT is purchasing the loans from their subsidiary lenders at cost -- it even says so in their 10k's / quarterly meetings. With some, these loans are also packaged off...
So, yeah, only those "true portfolio" loans are being held by their lenders. As it was mentioned before by the 'guy with the picture of the guitar,' one is talking about a 'subset of a subset of a subset...' Its sort of funny --- this exactly what they talk about for the stock markets, and yeah it applies mnay places, where people see one thing happen, then apply causality when there is no basis.
You must not read the news. That’s not how you get clicks. The headline that gets clicks goes something like “Banks get greedy. Force foreclosure on homeowner who paid on time, kick out tenants.”
Guess how worried you get when it’s your bank that’s named and that headline pops up? Imagine you’d share that article with your wife?
We live in a world where PR matters to EVERY business out there. Like it or not.
Couldn't you also see the headlines reading more like "Foreclosures on the Rise as Banks Crack Down on Predatory Investors". That's more like how they usually read these days, isn't it?
Sure, but if I’m writing the story for clicks, I’m using my headline.
The idea of a bunch of top bank execs sitting in a boardroom discussing policy, and making their decision out of fear of backlash from a handful of people in a Facebook group or a theoretical future blurb in the news, is ridiculous.
It starts with a meaningless IG post about a beer can. It ends in a $395M annual loss and entire brand tarnished by political spin. But sure, I’ll take your word for it.
You must not read the news. That’s not how you get clicks. The headline that gets clicks goes something like “Banks get greedy. Force foreclosure on homeowner who paid on time, kick out tenants.”
Guess how worried you get when it’s your bank that’s named and that headline pops up? Imagine you’d share that article with your wife?
We live in a world where PR matters to EVERY business out there. Like it or not.
Couldn't you also see the headlines reading more like "Foreclosures on the Rise as Banks Crack Down on Predatory Investors". That's more like how they usually read these days, isn't it?
Sure, but if I’m writing the story for clicks, I’m using my headline.
The idea of a bunch of top bank execs sitting in a boardroom discussing policy, and making their decision out of fear of backlash from a handful of people in a Facebook group or a theoretical future blurb in the news, is ridiculous.
It starts with a meaningless IG post about a beer can. It ends in a $395M annual loss and entire brand tarnished by political spin. But sure, I’ll take your word for it.
You must not read the news. That’s not how you get clicks. The headline that gets clicks goes something like “Banks get greedy. Force foreclosure on homeowner who paid on time, kick out tenants.”
Guess how worried you get when it’s your bank that’s named and that headline pops up? Imagine you’d share that article with your wife?
We live in a world where PR matters to EVERY business out there. Like it or not.
Couldn't you also see the headlines reading more like "Foreclosures on the Rise as Banks Crack Down on Predatory Investors". That's more like how they usually read these days, isn't it?
Sure, but if I’m writing the story for clicks, I’m using my headline.
The idea of a bunch of top bank execs sitting in a boardroom discussing policy, and making their decision out of fear of backlash from a handful of people in a Facebook group or a theoretical future blurb in the news, is ridiculous.
It starts with a meaningless IG post about a beer can. It ends in a $395M annual loss and entire brand tarnished by political spin. But sure, I’ll take your word for it.
Even using your bud-lite example it's a joke. If we just run with your figures, a $395 million loss is 6/10ths of 1 percent of AbInbev's annual sales. I know it feels like something when you see it on TV and self-proud activists want to bleat about bringing down bud-lite, but the total loss isn't even one percent of their annual revenue, which was about $58 billion (yes, with a "B"). It's almost a rounding error.
This is how you get fooled by media and the presumption that because you see it, it's a lot bigger than what it really is. That's why you think Mr. Morby is a giant whale when in reality he's not even plankton in the investment universe.
You must not read the news. That’s not how you get clicks. The headline that gets clicks goes something like “Banks get greedy. Force foreclosure on homeowner who paid on time, kick out tenants.”
Guess how worried you get when it’s your bank that’s named and that headline pops up? Imagine you’d share that article with your wife?
We live in a world where PR matters to EVERY business out there. Like it or not.
Couldn't you also see the headlines reading more like "Foreclosures on the Rise as Banks Crack Down on Predatory Investors". That's more like how they usually read these days, isn't it?
Sure, but if I’m writing the story for clicks, I’m using my headline.
The idea of a bunch of top bank execs sitting in a boardroom discussing policy, and making their decision out of fear of backlash from a handful of people in a Facebook group or a theoretical future blurb in the news, is ridiculous.
It starts with a meaningless IG post about a beer can. It ends in a $395M annual loss and entire brand tarnished by political spin. But sure, I’ll take your word for it.
Even using your bud-lite example it's a joke. If we just run with your figures, a $395 million loss is 6/10ths of 1 percent of AbInbev's annual sales. I know it feels like something when you see it on TV and self-proud activists want to bleat about bringing down bud-lite, but the total loss isn't even one percent of their annual revenue, which was about $58 billion (yes, with a "B"). It's almost a rounding error.
This is how you get fooled by media and the presumption that because you see it, it's a lot bigger than what it really is. That's why you think Mr. Morby is a giant whale when in reality he's not even plankton in the investment universe.
Let’s just bring this home…the market cap of AB was $132B on April 1. It is $113B today. That’s billion, with a “B”. For those keeping score that’s a hit of about $19B. Hardly chump change. I don’t need the “media” to help me with simple math.
As for the clout of Pace Morby…I couldn’t care less…as I’ve illustrated a SIMPLE story with some political spin can HAMMER a publically traded company. Plankton or not.
Honestly, if the insurance remains in place I have no idea how they would easily be able to do this nationally.
Utah for example is a non-disclosure state and the county records in 90% of the state are about as old as the time of Noah. It is hard enough to pull PRs in some areas. I imagine a lot of areas maybe not the majority but a lot are in this same bucket.
But like @Pace Jordan Morby mentioned the beauty of real estate is that there are multiple layers dealing in the buddle of rights and ownership so investors will find a way.
do keep in mind there are firms that their entire business is to track mortgages like an actuary and rate them to give the servicers and the banks a read on how many loans could be in trouble when they could be in trouble and how much reserves they need. Lenders are always doing this and are doing it a lot right now as lending tightens and reserves are being bolstered for what many think is going to be a real estate recession. Find information on transfers is kids play for any of these companies. Just have to subscribe to Property Radar for one they track pretty much nationwide. If the banks / note holders want to concentrate on transfers they can do it with ease. And if we start seeing a lot of forclosure action from failed sub too buyers this will hit their radars..
I totally believe you but in my experience at least here in Utah Due on Sale Caluse's being enforced is extremely rare like two or three in an escrow agent's career-type situation. It could be because we are a non-disclosure state or we are small compared to other markets but it is not common here.
Honestly, if the insurance remains in place I have no idea how they would easily be able to do this nationally.
Utah for example is a non-disclosure state and the county records in 90% of the state are about as old as the time of Noah. It is hard enough to pull PRs in some areas. I imagine a lot of areas maybe not the majority but a lot are in this same bucket.
But like @Pace Jordan Morby mentioned the beauty of real estate is that there are multiple layers dealing in the buddle of rights and ownership so investors will find a way.
do keep in mind there are firms that their entire business is to track mortgages like an actuary and rate them to give the servicers and the banks a read on how many loans could be in trouble when they could be in trouble and how much reserves they need. Lenders are always doing this and are doing it a lot right now as lending tightens and reserves are being bolstered for what many think is going to be a real estate recession. Find information on transfers is kids play for any of these companies. Just have to subscribe to Property Radar for one they track pretty much nationwide. If the banks / note holders want to concentrate on transfers they can do it with ease. And if we start seeing a lot of forclosure action from failed sub too buyers this will hit their radars..
I totally believe you but in my experience at least here in Utah Due on Sale Caluse's being enforced is extremely rare like two or three in an escrow agent's career-type situation. It could be because we are a non-disclosure state or we are small compared to other markets but it is not common here.
Escrow Agents would not be tracking notes being called.. right ? how would they know.. unless someone is doing a refinance and in conversation tells the escrow agent what happened..I have personally done well over 100 sub toos and my dad did over 500 of them when i was a young agent back in the late 70s and into the early 80s when rates were even worse than today this is not something that anyone Myself or Pace made up as a new model. its not. Myself on my own and working with my dad we flipped everything we only bought props with substantial equity that we could resell As fast as possible with my dads company doing mainly wraps as dispo on short term notes .. so the sellers were out of the deals with in 24 to 36 months.. For me it was rare to go over 18 months.. the thought of having someone else mortgage out there for years and years is pretty scary thing that most sellers dont comprehend on the front side of sub 2.
While it makes sense for them to call loans with a 3% rate in hopes of getting to lend at 7-8%, I still don't think many are going to be called. For one, few banks are paying that close of attention to that kind of thing. But also, foreclosure rates (while still low) are ticking up and any bank is going to be nervous about calling a loan that might trigger a default.
also there is no Volume of 7 to 8% loans being made volume is way down they start getting tons of payoffs they will have more cash than they can lend out so there is that as well. Its not balance your not going to replace a 3% loan payoff with a 8 % new origination in today market.
Honestly, if the insurance remains in place I have no idea how they would easily be able to do this nationally.
Utah for example is a non-disclosure state and the county records in 90% of the state are about as old as the time of Noah. It is hard enough to pull PRs in some areas. I imagine a lot of areas maybe not the majority but a lot are in this same bucket.
But like @Pace Jordan Morby mentioned the beauty of real estate is that there are multiple layers dealing in the buddle of rights and ownership so investors will find a way.
do keep in mind there are firms that their entire business is to track mortgages like an actuary and rate them to give the servicers and the banks a read on how many loans could be in trouble when they could be in trouble and how much reserves they need. Lenders are always doing this and are doing it a lot right now as lending tightens and reserves are being bolstered for what many think is going to be a real estate recession. Find information on transfers is kids play for any of these companies. Just have to subscribe to Property Radar for one they track pretty much nationwide. If the banks / note holders want to concentrate on transfers they can do it with ease. And if we start seeing a lot of forclosure action from failed sub too buyers this will hit their radars..
I totally believe you but in my experience at least here in Utah Due on Sale Caluse's being enforced is extremely rare like two or three in an escrow agent's career-type situation. It could be because we are a non-disclosure state or we are small compared to other markets but it is not common here.
Escrow Agents would not be tracking notes being called.. right ? how would they know.. unless someone is doing a refinance and in conversation tells the escrow agent what happened..I have personally done well over 100 sub toos and my dad did over 500 of them when i was a young agent back in the late 70s and into the early 80s when rates were even worse than today this is not something that anyone Myself or Pace made up as a new model. its not. Myself on my own and working with my dad we flipped everything we only bought props with substantial equity that we could resell As fast as possible with my dads company doing mainly wraps as dispo on short term notes .. so the sellers were out of the deals with in 24 to 36 months.. For me it was rare to go over 18 months.. the thought of having someone else mortgage out there for years and years is pretty scary thing that most sellers dont comprehend on the front side of sub 2.
So how many times did you have a Due on Sale Clause enforced
