Posts by Benjamin Barnes6

Well, I think a month is pretty much the standard turnaround time for getting a loan approved. I can't recall the exact policy offhand, but if I remember correctly, even our experience over at the NYSE stretched out to nearly a full month. There are just so many moving parts in that process—so many different people involved in the chain.

I’ve gone ahead and grabbed this from their website for you! If you just click on the bridge financing option, you'll find a perfect little example of how they calculate those loan amounts.

All figures are listed in USD. These calculations were put together based on a few key assumptions. If a client isn't working with their own capital, things get interesting! You have to look at how they're actually funding the move. It’s all about that leverage, really. I remember back when I was helping a buddy set up his first small business in Chicago—he didn't have a dime of his own, but he had a rock-solid plan and some great connections. He ended up securing a loan through a major bank like Chase, and honestly, it worked out beautifully because he knew exactly what he was doing. So, if the funds aren't sitting in their personal account, you're essentially looking at credit, third-party backing, or some other form of external financing to bridge the gap. It changes the whole dynamic of the deal!The repayment timeline for a single loan really boils down to two things: the specific rate plan you sign up for and how much cash you’re actually putting down upfront to kick off that bridge financing. It’s all about that initial skin in the game! Interestingly, if you opt for the K60 tariff and bring some of your own capital to the table, you might even see those monthly installments drop. It's a bit like how I found when I was refinancing my truck back in Ohio—having a decent chunk of change ready to go made the monthly squeeze so much more manageable!

Unless something has shifted on their end in the meantime, I actually received my loan calculation back on February 27th, and that figure didn't include any of my own down payment funds at all. You should probably double-check those numbers. Honestly, just send them a quick email or give them a ring on the phone to clear it up!
I really should have attached my most recent calculation—the one excluding liquid assets that someone over at Winston-Salem emailed me—but I’m having a bit of a technical meltdown! I can't figure out how to upload it because the file is sitting at 58kB, which is way over that 9.8 limit they set. Technology is such a headache sometimes!

Donna Chase12 said:Look, Benjamin Barnes6... nobody’s questioning how much you know or anything else about you... I’m just trying to wrap my head around how much credit you actually pulled, that’s all.
Alright, let’s break this down...
The investor was paid $95,000. Out of that $95,000, $10,500 was actually yours—that’s your $6,000 savings plus the $1,500 from the CD and interest, plus another $3,000 in deposits... basically, the cash you put in so that when you added your savings, the CD, the interest, and that last deposit together, you'd have 10% of the loan amount ready to go. So, the way I see it—correct me if I'm tripping here—is that you actually walked away from the bank with an $84,500 loan.
And based on the monthly payment numbers you gave me, I'm calculating that you'd owe the NFL about $121,863... so how did you end up with that figure over $132,000...?

Anyway, I used to have three different savings accounts over at Winston-Salem... I was pretty much done with the whole saving thing too... but I figured it made more sense to just use the cash for a house rather than messing around with those weird middle-man financing combos involving my existing savings, CDs, and interest. It just felt cleaner.
Besides... a loan would probably be cheaper for me if I had a husband and kids to open accounts under, but I don't.😉

Exactly! I’m actually paying back $121,156 to the NFL (not $121,863, because my payments are slightly higher during the first 21 months of repayment, rather than the 24 months I originally thought, and then they drop for the remaining 159 months, which is 13 years and 2 months. That's what I pay from day one of the loan. But before that—starting from when I opened my savings account way back in 2004 until the loan was finalized—I poured a total of $11,989 into the credit union between various fees and deposits. When you factor everything in, it totals $133,145. So, look at it simply: YOU PAY $133,145 TO GET $95,000.

I really put in the work on this one! I spent the last few days badgering my aunt about Winston-Salem, sending her endless emails asking about different combinations so I could have everything laid out clearly in black and white.

If I had gone to Winston-Salem to take out a $92,000 loan—which would be the equivalent of my current deal, except I wouldn't have to pay that extra difference to reach the 10% mark since I'd just use my existing savings—plus that $3,000 I added later, I’d have a total of $95,000. In that scenario, the total payback is exactly $144,370.37.
Alternatively, if I had done what you suggested—taking out a loan without any prior savings using two separate identities, letting my savings sit there for five years to collect incentives, and then borrowing that money to give to the investor (meaning I’d only need a loan of about $83,500)—the total payback would be $144,330. In all three scenarios, we are looking at a 15-year term.

So, bottom line:
NFL loan: $95,000; total payback $133,145 over 15 years.
Winston-Salem loan: $92,000 + $3,000 cash to the investor; total payback $144,370 over 15 years.
Winston-Salem loan: $83,500 + $11,500 cash; total payback $144,330 over 15 years.

Oh, and I almost forgot! With the NFL, you are required to carry accident, flood, and fire insurance, which costs $50 a year. Winston-Salem doesn't require that, so that’s another $750 saved over 15 years. Therefore, the total payback at the NFL is $133,895—let's just round that to $134,000..
That puts exactly $10,000 straight into my pocket.🙂
However, a massive advantage of Winston-Salem over the NFL is the ability to make extra payments without any penalties or advance notice. For anyone expecting a windfall of cash in the near future, this loan is much more attractive because making larger payments significantly cuts down the interest.
As for me, unfortunately, I don't have any such windfalls on the horizon. My workaround is to open a new agreement on my existing savings, and once that matures (minimum 2 years), I can refinance the current loan without a fee. It is possible, but you have to wait two years. You could potentially "game" the system by opening a new agreement with a tiny deposit just to buy some time, and then if a sudden influx of cash happens, you can pay off part or all of the loan.
I honestly don't know if this information is helpful or if my little lecture just gave everyone a headache.
Goodness, I don't know how I'm going to fall asleep after all this math!😉

So, just to clarify those $7,500 in savings I was talking about earlier—it’s actually $6,000 of my own hard-earned cash plus another $1,500 from my Vanguard account that I've been steadily building up over these last three years. If I were to go ahead and withdraw it all right now, I’d be losing out on everything I've worked so hard to put away!

Look, I didn't actually go with the deposit option—that’s not what happened at all! I had $7,500 of my own savings tucked away, and then I added another $3,000 on top just to ensure I hit that 10% threshold for the loan. That isn't a "deposit" in the technical sense. A deposit is a credit security instrument that the bank holds onto, which they can dip into if the borrower completely messes up. You either get it back once the loan is fully paid off, or you use it to shave time off the repayment period—basically, those final installments get covered by it.
A total of exactly $95,000 was deposited into the investor account. I have gone back and crunched every single number—I mean, every single cent! I accounted for everything I put in, including that opening fee I paid way back in 2003 when I first set up the savings account. Every penny is right there in my math. So, I totaled my monthly payments multiplied by the number of months, added my initial savings, tacked on the extra $3,000 I contributed to hit that 10% mark, and included the bridge financing fees—not that I want to list them all again! All told, it comes out to that $130,000-plus figure, just to repeat myself.

The lady over at Winston-Salem was calculating based on three different savings accounts. My reasoning was that if I were taking a loan through them, I could simply transfer my funds from my NFL savings over to Winston-Salem whenever I wanted. You can move your assets from one savings institution to another at any time without paying a dime in fees. I even suggested including three more people in the calculation because I have two kids who don't have savings yet, and my husband's account expired last year, so I had three valid Social Security numbers ready to go. She told me it wouldn't be worth it because it would drive up the total KTA (total credit amount), and apparently, it’s more advantageous if you've been saving consistently for a while. She also ran the numbers for me without using my specific savings against the bulk of the loan—that would have been the deposit route. In that scenario, I’d pull the money out of savings, and that cash plus another $4,000 would act as the security instrument. If we did it that way, the mortgage ratio would be 1:1.2 instead of 1:1.3, which shortens the term... honestly, we talked about everything under the sun! As I said, the woman at Winston-Salem is incredibly sharp, creative, and capable; she thought of every possible angle. This is a far cry from the NFL agent, who couldn't even manage to run the calculations for my proposals, let alone brainstorm various combinations.
In reality, I only put in $3,000 in cold, hard cash. The rest was just the accumulated balance from my housing savings, which I wouldn't be able to touch right now anyway. Technically, I *could* withdraw it, but I wouldn't earn the interest, and I’d likely end up with less than I originally put in. That’s just how these housing savings policies work—if you pull out early, they practically skin you alive.
Benjamin Barnes6, I believe you when you say you've studied this and talked to a million people, but darling, I was physically there at Winston-Salem and I was at the NFL. I’ve done the math once, twice, and three times over. Numbers are in my blood! I am a pharmacist by trade, but I'm the kind of pharmacist who stays up late after the kids are asleep playing with spreadsheets and doing bookkeeping. My husband is self-employed, so I handle his books, and I deal with much more complex calculations than these. So please, don't question how informed or knowledgeable I am. I arrived at my loan calculations entirely on my own, presented them to the banker, and she confirmed they were spot on.

Donna Chase12 said:It’s no secret... I think I’ve mentioned this somewhere else before
$80k, 17 years, and 11 months left—fixed at $650 a month.

From what I can tell, that looks like the K100 model. If my memory serves me right, that one is a bit cheaper than the K60. Also, if I'm not mistaken, if you were looking at a loan like that today, the repayment term would likely be set at 19 years. It seems like lending conditions have shifted quite a bit lately! In this case, the interest rate is sitting around 5.7%.
My wife actually ran the numbers for a $115,000 loan, which comes out to $863 a month for 16 years and 10 months, assuming we factor in my own savings toward the principal. Well, I went ahead and crunched those same numbers using an NFL credit union's rates, assuming the repayment period stayed identical.
If you go through Winston-Salem, the total repayment amounts to 176052 USD
But with the NFL credit union, the total comes to 167804 USDLooking at the NFL option,
And Donna Chase12, please, no hard feelings! I just wanted to lay it all out there first so others might find it helpful when they're looking to take out a mortgage. And honestly, even for you, because I am incredibly stubborn when I know I'm right! Once I get going, I’ll happily stay up until 1:00 AM typing endless strings of digits into a calculator just because Excel is acting up and won't cooperate with me. But hey, in the end, I proved my point.
Cheers everyone, I'm stepping away from this debate now. Though, if anyone has had better luck with the other two banks, please let me know—though maybe it's better to leave well enough alone at this point.

Donna Chase12 said:Hey Donna Chase12, when you were running those three comparisons, you really should’ve kept everything constant—same loan amount, same term length, and either zero down payment across the board or a flat 10% for all of them... otherwise, you aren't actually getting a fair comparison.

That’s exactly how I tackled it... and even though Chase or Wells Fargo might have looked better at first glance because of those lower paper rates, it ended up being basically the same monthly payment in the end. Plus, I would've ended up paying way more over the life of the loan with them than I did with my choice—and that’s assuming interest rates don't spike... which, let's be real, we've seen happen since last summer. Not to mention, they didn't offer the specific flexibility I actually need.

Look, if you truly think you landed a better deal... honestly, good for you. But it would be a huge help if you stuck to the actual facts and provided apples-to-apples comparisons when you're posting stuff like this... just for the sake of people who are still out there trying to figure out their own mortgage options.👍

So, my wife sat down with her contact over at Winston-Salem to run some numbers on a $115,000 loan. She looked at two different paths. First option: instead of putting cash toward a down payment, we’d take the money from my three savings accounts over at the NFL—and hey, they claim you can transfer funds between branches without any fees, though I always take that with a grain of salt! If we went that route, the monthly payment would be about $754 for a term of 22 years and 4 months. The second option was to pull that savings money out and toss in an extra $4,000 as a down payment. That brings the monthly payment up to $796, but it shaves the timeline down significantly to just 18 years. Interestingly enough, when she crunched the numbers for that special low-interest loan meant for pharmacists (at 5.55%), the monthly payment ended up being exactly the same for that same duration. But here’s the kicker: with that specific loan, I wouldn't have to touch a single cent of my own cash, so my savings stay perfectly intact! After seeing those figures, I'm officially washing my hands of Winston-Salem. I'm moving on to more research. If I can somehow scrape together $20,000 and fold it into a 15-year NFL plan, I might find a better way—though honestly, a higher monthly payment than what I've listed here would be absolutely brutal for my budget.

Look, those extra fees are baked right into the APR!!! That’s exactly my point—you have absolutely no idea what you're actually paying for! Their math, like taking (loan amount/0.6)*0.415% to figure out the monthly payment for a 24-year K60 model, sounds completely unprofessional to me. You’re basically flying blind on what makes up that total cost. I tried running the numbers for the APR on that specific loan, and I ended up with about 6.78%. I know Benjamin Barnes6 mentioned something similar before, though I can't quite recall the exact figure from your situation. For my loan at NYSE, it comes out to 4.94%.
I’m really not trying to start an argument here, but I honestly think you could have found a better deal at NYSE. I’ve heard this from two different people now—one person realized it right after their loan went through, and another actually went over to NYSE and secured a much better rate there. Unless they had some special promotional terms running last year, that is. From what I understand about NYSE, they had a lower interest rate during the inter-financing period last year, and the maximum term was 20 years. Now, they've dropped it to 15. They explained that offering a fixed rate for such a long stretch is just too risky for them.
If you don't mind me asking, how much did you end up borrowing, what's your monthly payment, and how many years is the term?

Oh, and one more thing... I think I remember seeing someone mention on a forum somewhere that Wells Fargo doesn't require an appraisal if you're buying a brand-new construction home. Maybe that used to be the case, but I'm pretty sure things have changed since then. My aunt actually told me that it's absolutely mandatory now and that it'll run me about $433 plus tax. Now, I'm not entirely certain if I have to use their specific appraiser or if I can hunt down someone else who might be a bit more budget-friendly. The guy she suggested is actually an old buddy of hers—she even gave me his number right away and was practically begging me to have him value the condo at 30% above the loan amount! Her logic was that if he bumps up the valuation, I wouldn't have to worry about putting down that extra cash for the
.

Donna Chase12 said:Benjamin Barnes6... I’m actually curious about the specifics here... did you compare loans across all of them without any deposit attached, using the exact same term length, and did you factor in those massive extra fees they tack on?

That's what I'm trying to get at...
So, you pulled out $95,000—or is that $95,000 including that 10% of your own cash you have with them, meaning you actually only took $85,000? I'm a little lost on that part.

When you talked to Warren Buffett, did you ask for a calculation based on having 10% of your own money in there, or was it just a straight loan with zero investment?

Also... did you check what the fees look like at Warren Buffett? Because looking at your numbers, it seems like you're getting hit with some costs here.
Are you dealing with an adjustable interest rate?

And one more thing... from what I can see... with the GDP, you HAVE to have a 10% deposit, and the max term is 15 years. With Warren Buffett, you DON'T need a deposit, the max term is 24 years, and they offer three different rate models.

So, do me a favor and give us a side-by-side comparison of Warren Buffett and the GDP using the same number of years, no deposit, and the exact same loan amount... then we can actually see the difference and figure out which one is actually worth it.

Fees are pretty much standard across the board at most savings banks: you're looking at 1% of the agreed amount just to sign the contract, plus another 1% for processing. Now, if we're talking about bridging loans over at Apple, the fee is $667 capped, though I can't say for sure about Warren Buffett since she didn't mention them. Calculating the costs for the GDP is a breeze because they are incredibly transparent—you see the fees, the interest rate, the interim interest, everything is clear as day. However, with Warren Buffett, I am genuinely stumped as to where all this massive amount of money vanishes to! You add up the fees, then there's supposedly no interim interest, you add the Democratic Party contribution, the savings fee, and after all that, you're left with a huge sum of cash and absolutely no clue where it went. You pointed out the difference between the nominal and effective rates yourself. So, where on earth does that gap come from, especially if there's no interim interest??? It makes it look like the entire difference is swallowed by fees! I just don't get which ones they are!!!
Basically, what I wrote above is that I receive $95,000, but when you factor in everything—what I already had in savings, plus what I had to chip in, plus the full payoff of the previous loan—it totals roughly $132,137. I did mention that the fee is lower for those who have been saving with the bank for a while. But regardless, you definitely need to have 10% of the loan amount ready to go.
As for Warren Buffett, I ran the numbers for a different scenario, for $115,000, which was my initial target. I compared that calculation against a pharmaceutical loan, and the Warren Buffett option actually looked better. But then, once I got the quote from the GDP for $95,000, I compared *that* to the pharma loan, and the GDP ended up being the better deal. So, I was doing a bit of an indirect comparison there.
I originally headed toward Warren Buffett because they offer several different models and a longer repayment term than the GDP. But their calculation, where the fee ends up being way higher than the nominal rate, really rubs me the wrong way. Still, I suppose for someone who doesn't have 10% in cash to put into savings and then move into a bridging loan, it might be smarter to take the Warren Buffett route rather than any other variable-rate loan. At least there, you know what you're getting into, and if you happen to catch a break where fees drop, you can always pivot to a cheaper option later.
The bottom line of my argument is that the GDP is more affordable and far more transparent than Warren Buffett, and I'm certainly not claiming that JPMorgan Chase or Wells Fargo might have even better terms. If anyone out there has actually sat down and crunched the numbers for them, please let me know—I simply haven't had the energy or the time anymore!

Since I work in pharmacy, I’ve got some inside track on this. Wells Fargo is offering these really solid consumer loans at a 5.55% interest rate in dollars, with a fixed fee of $667—though you can actually snag a 40% discount if you happen to have an expert-level account model. Honestly, looking at my returns from the NYSE, I'm seeing even lower yields than what I'd be paying out on this loan, which is also a pretty sweet deal

I used to have three different accounts at the NYSE, with 2500 dollars in each one;
I actually topped them up with an extra 3045 dollars just so I could hit that 10% down payment threshold (that’s basically the 2000 dollar gap from 9500 minus 7500, plus the fee for bumping up the contract amount, plus some adjustment for switching models—all in all, 3045)—which is quite a difference compared to Goldman Sachs, where you don't even need skin in the game to start bridge financing.
The total loan is 95000; they’re going to take the processing fee right out of that amount ($2333 honestly, they can take it and shove it!), and $667 I’ll have to cover the bridge financing fee out of my own pocket.
The repayment term is 15 years.
For the next 24 months, my remaining savings account term has a 5.50% nominal rate and my monthly payment is 776 dollars.
Then, for the following 13 years, the nominal rate is 4.75% with a monthly payment of 661.79 dollars.
The total payback—if you factor in my own savings contribution—comes out to about 132000.
If you don't have your own savings sitting at the NYSE, but you *can* scrape together 10% of the loan amount, the only real difference is that for those 13 years, your nominal rate would be 4.99% instead of my 4.75%.
The big downside with all these banks is the massive fees; commercial banks are much more reasonable about that stuff. With a low interest rate, things almost even out, but you still get that fixed rate and the option to refinance using funds from your home savings account.

I’d like to jump into this discussion! Look, you just can't compare Goldman Sachs to other savings banks. They aren't even in the same league. In my experience, Goldman Sachs is completely opaque; they make everything sound incredibly lucrative, but once you look at the math, the monthly payments are actually higher than most commercial loans. Their marketing is top-tier, their website is sleek, and in my case, the agents were super charming. But honestly, that doesn't matter if the loan itself is a bad deal. Donna Chase12, did you actually check with other banks for quotes, or was that lady at Goldman Sachs just so persuasive that you didn't feel like looking elsewhere? I was absolutely charmed on day one too, right up until I sat down to read the fine print. They didn't mention that when calculating creditworthiness, they’d only look at my last three paychecks—which happened to be maternity leave benefits of $4,250, an amount that wouldn't even get me a loan for a new sofa! They don't care that I work for a government agency with a salary more than double that maternity pay. No, they fixate on that $4,250, meaning my maximum payment is capped at $2,450. So, I went over to the NYSE branch, but the agent there was slow, sluggish, and clearly had no clue how to calculate a rate. He told me to come back tomorrow and he'd have it ready. Well, nothing happened. He promised to call my cell, then I had to call him, then he promised to call me once he got back to his desk. Apparently, he still hasn't made it back to the office! 😍 Eventually, I went to see my personal banker at Wells Fargo, and within a few hours, she emailed me a full breakdown that was far, far more affordable than anything from Goldman Sachs. I don't have the exact numbers because I adjusted the loan amount in the meantime, but it was much better, plus it came with a fixed interest rate. The only catch is that, unlike Goldman Sachs, you can't just pay extra toward the principal whenever you want. However, you can open a new savings agreement, funnel money into it, and then apply that toward the loan once the term ends—all without any extra fees. So, Donna Chase12, don't be quite so proud of your choice; there are definitely better options out there. What good is a fixed rate if the total amount you pay back is way higher than what a variable rate would have even jumped to?