Good morning Randy. The article misses the bigger picture. The volume that is done the more revenues will come in. There are many in the mortgage business that are now looking to do more FHA business, I'm one of them.
Randy Kirsch
Manchester, CT
Hi Randy. A liberal editorial writer hasn't got a clue about the cycles the real estate market goes through.
Randy Kirsch
Manchester, CT
I would think that the reduced annual MIP would increase the volume of loans that would more than offset the reduction, when it comes to a final bottom line revenue stream George Souto - I think the editorial is off base and hopefully will not be taken seriously by FHA, HUD or any other involved party.
Thanks for sharing, George.
I think FHA can continue its road to recovery as well with an increase in volume. I don't think the writer realized the impact of the higher fees on the number of loans that are placed with FHA Joe Petrowsky - as for the increased risk, I am not sure that is real and in any event can be managed.
Thanks for sharing, Joe.
I believe the writer was only interested in politics Conrad Allen - as soooo many people are in Washington, D.C.
Thanks for sharing, Conrad.
Randy I disagree with the article. It is simple economics, you can raise revenues buy increasing price and produce less volume, or you can decrease price and produce more volume. The first only benefits the supplier, the second benefits both supplier and consumer.
The are also wrong about the reduction being minimal to the Borrower, the .5% reduction in the MI is the same as .5% reduction in the interest rate, and that is not a small savings.
Randy Kirsch
Manchester, CT