I wrote up a “Summary of my Year” and I sent it out to about 600 contacts of all the friends & family on 4 of the 6 email accounts I have. I sent these out in increments of 10 to 20 at a time so there would be no chance of any one getting my entire mailing list which seems to happen sometimes. It took me all day to do it. I received about 80 responses and have had some 300 exchanges from this mail-out.
We received a number of leads and several great ones. I received some wonderful messages from long lost friends and was saving those for when I had more time to write a longer response, but now concerned I may actually fail to respond as they get barried further & deeper. Below is some of letters I received in return that concern the mortgage program that was highlighted in my post. It should offer some insight into different considerations being worked out about this mortgage program both as a product and as a business.
Over the last 3 months, I had also made about 200 office visits to members of congress and met with about 40 of them (in the hall ways). About 10 of them seemed geniunely interested but it was always as they were leaving town so could not do the follow up other then by email which I did. (I would catch them for what was suppose to be the last day of congress, but they would come back again for more emergency meetings.) So I have written about 200 emails (as a follow up to those offices I visited) with 3 good leads and nice responses. I may print those up when I get more time. I also emailed out to about 70 media contacts/outlets. All without a response. It has been a long, expensive year for me. The new year looks promising. We will have to see what the good Lord has in mind.
*&* *&* *&*
*&* *Interest on 2nd Loan Resolves Legal Issues* *&*
From: Raghu John To: M**** S***** <*****@yahoo.com>; A**** C**** <****@aol.com>
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 1:50:44 PM
Subject: Fw: 12/10 for investor
HI M**** & A*****,
I’m forwarding to you the endorsement letter from the credit union. The letter goes on to explain both how it works and its benefits to distressed homeowner and bank.
The CEO had the program entirely vetted by the CU's accounting firm and their legal counsel so its legal both for accounting and regulatory purposes. I can send you the accountants feedback on this as well.
Put simple, we only need to charge a small interest rate of say 1% on the second loan and it becomes a ready to go, turnkey system.
The CEO also included the Power Point Presentation you used for his presentation in Florida on this program. They changed the name from DeLETO to FAB for the Fast Equity Builder Mortgage.
Let's talk when you get back. I'll show you how it can work for your clients. They will love it and should help your sales by double, triple or more.
Happy holiday's,
Raghu
*&* *Legal Issues Worked out by Credit Union Accountants & Lawyers* *&*
________________________________________
From: Raghu John To: John Dunham < jrd@*****economics.com >
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 7:26:38 PM
Subject: Re: FW: One of my clients has an idea that may be of interest to your members
Thanks for this John.
As for the legality, that has been settled by simply charging 1% interest on the 2nd loan. The issue before was if we could have a loan that charged no interest or could come with a tax deduction as well as the issue of ownership. However, once you charge something for the second loan, it requires no further regulatory or accounting changes. This 1% maybe small, but its well worth the cash infusion for the banks against the 20% of their mortgage holdings.
This is one of several issues we resolved while working with the Credit Union's accounting firm. So as of the credit unions involvement, the mortgage program is now 100% legal. The issue of ownership is no different then it would be with an interest only loan. Its the same catagory now.
Adding that small interest on the 2nd loan settled all these issues. Hope this offers you some added reassurance about the validity of this program. You don't need to have a trap door for yourself any more. lol Its good to go. You can present it boldly now. I think meeting the credit union CEO would have provided you the confidence that you are now missing in presenting this. You should try an meet up with them. You won't be so opologetic about this anymore once you have met with them. You have a solid financial product.
--- On Thu, 12/11/08, J*** D**** < jrd@*****economics.com> wrote:
From: J**** D**** Subject: FW: One of my clients has an idea that may be of interest to your members
To: ssriraghu@yahoo.com
Date: Thursday, December 11, 2008, 1:46 PM
Here is what I sent
One of my clients (a guy named John Guiffre) ….. wants to start a policy non-profit to develop ideas to the public on ways to solve society’s problems.
He came up with an interesting mortgage idea…. Basically, it restructures mortgages kind of like an auto lease, with a small short term mortgage that builds equity for the buyer, and then a longer term standard mortgage – actually could be any type of mortgage – for the remainder of the value.
I had mentioned it to Paul before he left but since Paul was transitioning it probably never got anywhere.
In the intervening period, John has been out pitching his concept on the Hill, in letters to the editor, and to pretty much anyone that would speak with him. Over the last month or so, he got some buy in from the Credit Union people. He just sent me this letter and asked if I would forward it to you folks.
Anyway, let me know what you think. If it’s of interest I can put you in touch with John.
Also did you want to discuss the other project? I’m out next week (on vacation but working), so I will have time to get started on it then.
Best
J**** D****
*&* *No Need for Market to Market Write down & Capital Requirements *&*
--- On Tue, 12/23/08, John Michael wrote:
From: John Michael Subject: No need for 'market to market' capital because never 'wrote down' the price
To: "******" <****r@*****.net>, "***** C******"
Date: Tuesday, December 23, 2008, 8:27 AM
Thankz for getting back to me ****t,
Yes, I had so much to say, I needed more time to organize my thoughts.
The biggest is this discovery made yesterday in a phone conference to a real estate investor with about 200 properties in a small town of Florida that wanted to know if the RADHA Loan could help him sell his properties. He would like to sell them all. I think we can. He sees how this would certainly work for banks with distressed properties which his are not so is still enthusiastic about it in approaching other banks and investors that are distressed and providing this to them as a new service.
The conversation with this fellow allowed me to see that we should not have to re-capitalize for the ‘market to market’ write down because we have not actually reduced the principle cost of our loans. We are in fact doing the exact opposite: we are re-established the loan amount back to its original price even when the market price has fallen.
The RADHA loan simply has the homeowner payoff this first 20% (of an upside down property) separately and much faster, but it is still being fully paid. We achieve this by reducing the interest. We provide these savings through interest reductions, not price and principle write-downs. The only ‘market to market’ write down would be for any thing above this 20% paid off by the homeowner. We make up savings/reductions using the interest, not the principle so there should be no need for any recapitalizing requirements.
In our standard example of the $200,000 home, we refinance the first $40,000 into a 4 year loan. This is being paid off by the homeowner, but it is not reducing the price of the home. There is no need to then have to put an additional $40,000 against it because it is already being paid off by the homeowner, not the bank. The purpose of ‘market to market’ recap(ing) against this is so the bank has the money to write it off, but there is no need to write it off because the homeowner is paying it off.
Now let’s say the CU put’s in an additional $10,000. So instead of the amount being for $40,000, it is $50,000. The CU would not need to then put in $10,000 for this (added $10,000) because the bank has already paid for this write down which is the purpose for the ‘market to market’ capital match. If you were to instead decide to pay for that $10,000 write off in the 5th year of refinancing, only then would you need to add that $10,000 today. The purpose of the capital is to have the money to pay for the offset, but if the homeowner is paying it or the CU has already paid it (for ex. The $10,000) then there is no need to add the extra capital.
I realized this because I was explaining that for regulatory and accounting purposes, the loan is an exact duplicate of the ‘interest-only’ loan, but rather then it being interest, it is pays down, it is the principle itself it pays down. There is no need to provide an capital off-set for an interest-only loan and therefore, non required for the RADHA Loan either.
Do you have to provide a ‘market to market’ write down on interest reductions too? That would mean all these banks reducing their interest rates would now have to provide the ‘capital’ against the amount of these interest rate reductions too. I am under the impression that this is not the case. Is there a ‘market to market’ re-capitalization requirement for interest rate reductions or just for principle? I’m assuming that it is just for principle reductions, not interest.
If true, the RADHA loan would reduce the banks’ capital set-aside requirements by 80% to 100%. We/I need to talk with your accounts about this. If we are right, we will have these super-incentives for banks. Not only will we cut their write-downs (write-offs) by 80% to 100% but we will be able to also reduce the banks ‘market to market’ recapitalization requirements of these loans as well. This would be on top of them getting the capital infusion from selling this 1st term loan to 3rd party financing companies. They get to pocket this cash on top of sidestepping the additional capital offsets. This would be incredible. We need to confirm this with your accounts asap.
Another thing that came to mind talking with this investor from Florida was the idea of having the city/count/state offer the banks a 1% to 2% tax rebate (or the equivalent in ‘tax credits’) against the 2nd loan. This would provide banks 3% worth of interest rates on the 2nd loan. (It would be 4% if we included the interest on the 1st loan as well.) So banks would charge 1% on the loan to the homeowner, plus 2% in tax credits from the state/county, plus the equivalent of 1% more worth of interest on the 1st loan if they financed that as well. A 3% to 4% rate of return on the 2nd mortgage should be more than enough to entice banks into the program when included against the savings in write downs and upfront cash infusions.
I wrote up a year in review email to my 600 contacts and received about 50 emails in response with 3 good leads with requests for follow presentations. Talked with the fellow from Florida yesterday. He has about 200 properties and knows similar investors. He also has good working relationships with the local banks in the area. He is a medium size ‘fish’ in a small pond, so has access to all the top players of his area from banking heads and local politicians to other mid size investors. He would like to talk with you and or C**** before he moves ahead in taking this to his bankers, investors etc. How bout this morning? He requested 9:30 am. Would either of you be available for that?
I’m also set up to meet with a couple fellows this afternoon from a mortgage brokerage from a community development outreach service. I may try an call you this afternoon to speak with them if it goes well. I should know the time later today.
We then have the fellow I wrote you and ***** about, Mr. *****. Mr. *****is a 3rd generation banker, oilman, politician and so has lots access. T*** said he has access to any of the heads of the big banks on short notice and is ready to take this to them once he has had a chance to talk with you and/or ***** on specific examples of how this works. He just wants to make sure it works before he puts himself out there. And so, with the interest finally gaining some momentum, we should go over our presentation to cover all these added features and benefits.
....as for the other issues from your last email. I’ll write to those next. Just wanted to get this off for now.
Old friend,
Raghu
--- On Mon, 12/22/08, <****r@********net> wrote:
From: <****r@********net>
Subject: RE: For get questions, lets have ph. conference
To:***hraghu@yahoo.com
Date: Monday, December 22, 2008, 11:43 AM
Any thoughts on my last email?
****** ******
President/CEO
***** ******* ******** Association
***** -A Main Street
Fairfax, VA 22031
703-425-*****
www.C******
>>> On 12/16/2008 at 12:48 PM, in message John Michael wrote:
Hi ****, *****, & ******,
So this is a letter to set up a meeting with J**** contact. Here's a small description of who these contacts are-listed in his letter below. In other words, its a great lead and so if they like my presentation, we may have them calling you up for further details and verification.
Just wanted to try an coordinate things so there's no sudden surprises for you guys. It will also be good if we are all on the same page here on this. If so, we could have a new account as early as this week.
It seems like they may want to talk today. I'll be happy to let you know if you are interested or else, I'll just notify you when they are ready to talk with you.
Raghu
--- On Tue, 12/16/08, J**** B**** Esq. <*****@*****net> wrote:
> From: JB, Esq. <*****@***.net>
> Subject: RE: For get questions, lets have ph. conference
> To: ohraghu@yahoo.com
> Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 11:55 AM
> Thanks - I will have John***** give you a call. His father
> is also a long time tax/SEC lawyer and his family a few
> generations of congressmen out of Ohio.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Michael [mailto:ohraghu@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 8:43 AM
> To:**** Esq.
> Subject: RE: For get questions, lets have ph. conference
>
> Look forward to it. My phone number in case you dont' have it is
>
>
*&* *Commission Arrengement* *&*
From: Raghu John To: **** ****; *****; *******; Raghu Sent: Friday, December 26, 2008 2:30:11 PM
Subject: Working arrengement: $1 million in commission
Merry Christmas ********,
I wonder how much of your ‘busy’ is due to ‘low interest rates and the Christmas season’ and how much of it has to do with credit unions becoming the new, big player in town? lol.
The Credit Unions community partnership is finally showing itself the golden boy it has always been. Other financial institutions were too big for the small American player. You’re no longer the little train that could, but the only reliable one that runs. Lol.
The best example of course is this mortgage program. You identified the opportunities coming from the community level and have been so responsive in every step of this project. Thank you very much for this. This was too small for banks, but your modesty has allowed you to take advantage of this asset. I see my appreciation expressed in your booming business. Apparently, I’m not the only one who loves you guys. Bravo! lol
Mind my own slow response. I had to identify the simple answer to your encouraging letter. I think the punch line is that the potential for this program will reach a turning point and expand rapidly from there. So the question becomes whether to organize for our present status as a tiny operation or for the outside potential of this program.
Putting together all the pieces for a small program will offer us the model from which to grow. Having your company there to service accounts, for example, would allow us to begin looking to contract with larger players to expand upon that service. So you can cherry pick your clients while we look for 3rd parties to service the other riskier loans that may come along. This will allow us to begin a retail operation to introduce this product to the public. In this way, your company adds to the menu of services the RADHA Group offers while your company chooses the best of the clients it will service.
However, stepping in now makes you more than a service provider. It leaves you helping like a founding principle of the company. Your example provides us a great marketing demo and a broader menu of services while we approach other companies and market segments.
As you said, you would be a consulting service but one that serves several roles. You could service a few homeowner accounts, but primarily, you would stand in as a marketing demo for other companies to review. This would allow you to generate revenues from several sources. There would be the typical servicing fees from/for homeowners. There would also be consultancy fees for helping other banks set up this program. As a final bonus, you would also share the on-going commissions generated from banks who signed on to use the FAB Loan.
Let’s take the example of Bank Of America that you mentioned. Let’s say we landed BOA as an account. They decide to use the FAB mortgage. I think they have 800,000 upside down home mortgages, but it may be just 400,000 homes. Our fee would run about $200 per home financed by our program. This one account would generate a commission of $800 million to $1.6 billion. Most of this is profit. Of course, securing even 1% of such volume would still leave us with a tidy commission of $800,000 to $1.6 million.
Here’s an income break down for your company. There would be fees from BOA for the initial consultancy on how the program works. You may find additional revenues from a partnership with BOA in helping them service select accounts based upon your own financial preferences and capacity. You would then also receive an additional part of the RADHA Groups commission from BOA’s use of the FAB loan.
Let’s say the RADHA Groups commission from BOA totaled $3 million over the next year. (This $3 million is to work from a very conservative estimate to the kinds of commissions we would be looking at.) This would be for using the FAB Loan. Your consultancy service would get 30% (as an example) of that $3 million commission. This would leave your company with a $1 million share in fees. You may have also received $5,000 from BOA for the initial consultancy. You may find another $50 million worth of (cherry) home owner accounts for your mortgage company to service on behalf of BOA (while they tend to the rest).
In this example, your mortgage company gets $50 million in new accounts to service from BOA. $1 million from the RADHA Group from our commission from BOA as well as $5,000 in petty cash for your initial time to consult BOA on the service. You could also have some equity position in the company as long as it was within the legal framework of your mortgage company.
This is a demo of how we could organize things between our companies. It may take time to land larger accounts, but we can find smaller institutions ready for this FAB program. We could close on a couple small accounts by the end of Jan. and double that by Feb. 09. Business would expand exponentially after we have this many clients using our program.
The bottom line is that your company and the FAB Loan are so complimentary to each other’s performance. There’s all sorts of ways we can supplement our efforts or share the rewards. We have a lot of flexibility to tailor things around your interest and capacity. If there was any limitation, it would be in another company coming along to develop this kind of working arrangement with us. The big advantage is that you are the first to the table. At this point, you can set it any way you like. That will change once others join us.
The example above is an outline to work from in charting out your/company’s role? Clarifying your role seemed to be the bigger issue of your letter. As for the specifics involved in servicing the loans themselves, I have a few suggestions that should help satisfy much of the issues raised in your letter below. We can talk to those issues in our follow up correspondence. Outlining our working arrangement seemed like a good place to start for now.
Let’s see if we can work out the bulk of these issues by the end of the year so we can be ready to move forward by the 1st of the year.
I’m also forwarding ****** a copy for his input as well. I’ll have a response to the issues you raised about the loans within the next day or two.
Merry Christmas & Happy New Year.
Raghu
*&* FAB Same as ‘Interest Only Loan’ *&*
--- On Tue, 12/16/08, Raghu John wrote:
From: Raghu John Subject: Re: FW: FAB no different then a 3 to 5 year interest only loan
To: "W****M******" Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 12:36 PM
I just forwarded you a copy of the letter I sent to S****. If we can include his offer to service the accounts along with some examples on how he used it, that would complete the package…..
As another side note, if we can have the accountant complete the spread sheet he made for C**** so we can include that in our package, that pretty much gives us entire package ready to go. We would then simply need a loan application form and non competition agreement. Let’s talk. Hope you had a great week end.
Friend,
rAghu
--- On Tue, 12/16/08, W****, M**** < MW****@****> wrote:
From: W****M******< MW****@****>
Subject: FW: FAB no different than a 3 to 5 year interest only loan
To: ssriraghu@yahoo.com
Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 10:36 AM
From: W****M******
Sent: Tue 12/16/2008 8:47 AM
To: CC*******
Cc: ssriraghyu@yahoo.com
Subject: FW: FAB no different then a 3 to 5 year interest only loan
C**** - Raghu responded to the B**** J**** (lawyers) opinion.
- m -
From: Raghu John [mailto:ssriraghu@yahoo.com]
Sent: Mon 12/15/2008 11:30 PM
To: W****M******
Subject: FAB no different then a 3 to 5 year interest only loan
Thank you for this M*****.
Can I forward my response to Ca***** on this as well or is this just between the 2 of us?
Though the attorney states that it is unusual, nowhere in the references he provided did it make an issue of a loan shorter than 15 years (only longer then a 30 year) nor did the references make an issue of the size of the first loan from what I saw.
As for referring to this loan as unusual, I'm a little surprised to hear that for this is no different than an 'interest-only' loan which is on average about 3 to 5 years too. The only difference for the most part is that we simply charge a lot less interest on the 2nd mortgage then an interest only loan would normally charge.
I would be interested to see what the law books say about an interest only loan. Why would our program be any different technically speaking for accounting and legal purposes? It’s an exact duplicate actually minus the way in which we divide the loan wherein we are writing down the principle rather than just the interest.
However, the attorney is right about the actual function of our system which is that we are writing down the same loan: the principle from the back end and the interest from the front end. What I mean by this is that most loans have the rectangle cut in half at an angle wherein the first payment is almost exclusively interest while the last payment of the 30 year mortgage is almost exclusively principle. Our system has the homeowner pay the principle from the back end and the bank is writing off (or charging little) interest from the front end at the same time therefore we build more equity faster, but besides that, our system is no different as an accounting and legal consideration then an interest-only loan.
It would be interesting to see what the books say about an interest only loan program. Hope this adds something to the discussion.
Raghu
--- On Mon, 12/15/08, W****M****** < MW****@****> wrote:
From: WM < MW****@****>
Subject: confidential
To: ssriraghu@yahoo.com
Cc: "C****, C****" Date: Monday, December 15, 2008, 8:11 PM
Hi Raghu - C**** is forwarding the opinion from our attorney concerning the 80/20 split….. Please keep it in strict confidence. Thanks.
- m -
From: J****, B******.. [mailto:B J****, B******.@******]
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 8:58 AM
To: C*****, C*****
Cc: W****M******; V*** E****, J**** D.
Subject: RE: Question about Mortgages
Good morning,
I was out of the office yesterday afternoon.
You will need to document carefully the reason for this restructuring. It appears to be a very unusual 20% first / 80% second split.
The refinance would appear to have to comply with the rules on first liens for the 20%. That puts the second mortgage under the more limited authority of 1757 5 (A) (ii)
(i) a residential real estate loan on a one-to-four-family dwelling, including an individual cooperative unit, that is or will be the principal residence of a credit union member, which is secured by a first lien upon such dwelling, and may have a maturity not exceeding thirty years or such other limits as shall be set by the National Credit Union Administration Board (except that a loan on an individual cooperative unit shall be adequately secured as defined by the Board), subject to the rules and regulations of the Board;
(ii) a loan to finance the purchase of a mobile home, which shall be secured by a first lien on such mobile home, to be used by the credit union member as his residence, a loan for the repair, alteration, or improvement of a residential dwelling which is the residence of a credit union member, or a second mortgage loan secured by a residential dwelling which is the residence of a credit union member, shall have a maturity not to exceed 15 years or any longer term which the Board may allow.
The 15-year limit on second mortgage loans is extended to 20-years under the NCUA rules in Part 701.21:
*(Note by Raghu: I realized after reading this again that once the first loan is paid off, the 2nd loan is no longer a 2nd loan, but a 1st loan again.)*
(f) 20-Year Loans. (1) Notwithstanding the general 15-year maturity limit on loans to members, a Federal credit union may make loans with maturities of up to 20 years in the case of:
(i) a loan to finance the purchase of a mobile home if the mobile home will be used as the member-borrower’s residence and the loan is secured by a first lien on the mobile home, and the mobile home meets the requirements for the home mortgage interest deduction under the Internal Revenue Code,
(ii) a second mortgage loan (or a nonpurchase money first mortgage loan in the case of a residence on which there is no existing first mortgage) if the loan is secured by a residential dwelling which is the residence of the member-borrower, and
(iii) a loan to finance the repair, alteration, or improvement of a residential dwelling which is the residence of the member-borrower.
Obviously, the non-discrimination rules of Section 701.31, ECOA, Fair Housing Act and related rules on loans to members from Treasury (BSA, KYC) and other rulemakers apply as they do to all loans.
Finally, since the Credit Union will hold both the first and second, depending on where the property is located, the two loans may actually still be considered one in the event of default (not a bad thing given the current economic situation).
J****, B******.
V***** LLP
5*** 7th St. NW
Washington, DC 20004-1601
tel. 202-***-*****
fax. 202-344-****
e-mail: b****@*****.com
From: C*****, C**** [mailto:C******@*****]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 5:47 PM
To: J****, B******.
Cc: W****M******
Subject: Question about Mortgages
Hello B***** –
Question: re: Are there any NCUA restriccions (s) when re-structuring a mortgage loan :
Is it acceptable to split the the mortgage as follows:
The first mortgage at a value of up to 20% of the mortgage. ,
The second mortgage for the remaining of the mortgage balance.
Thank you for the advice.
C**** C****
CEO
**********************************************************************
U.S. Treasury Circular 230 Notice: Any tax advice contained in this communication(including any attachments) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (a) avoiding penalties that may be imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or by any other applicable tax authority; or (b) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matter addressed herein. We provide this disclosure on all outbound e-mails to assure compliance with new standards of professional practice, pursuant to which certain tax advice must satisfy requirements as to form and substance.
*&* *Great Contact & Lead* *&*
________________________________________
From: Raghu John To: **** ***** <*****@*****>; **** **** Pres./CEO ****** <*****@******.**** >; ***** **** <****@****.****>
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 5:28:09 PM
Subject: Do we have working models for Mr ****?
Hi **** & ****,
Just got off the phone with **** contact. His name is *****. He said he can take it right to the heads of banks and federal gov't on short notice once he has seen how it works. He primarily needs some working examples. That would satisfy most of his concerns. The biggest issue of course is the market to market write downs and how they are handled. From what I understand, this has been resolved by ***** accountant.
…It sounds like this guy can take the program to the top. we just need a couple working examples. If not, he's willing to try it himself among his own group, but it means a much slower turn around time to market and promote this.
He's going to write an email restating what I mentioned here. Are you guys ready to talk to him to answer his questions …….?
Raghu
*&* *CATO President* *&*
--- On Wed, 12/17/08, Raghu John wrote:
From: Raghu John Subject: The Radha Group
To: "Gene Healy" Date: Wednesday, December 17, 2008, 7:42 PM
Hi Gene,
I guess my fantasy job would be to work for you guys. lol
I had written to you some years ago and so you were still on my contacts list so ended up with my years summary review for friends and family which was primarily about this new mortgage system that will resolve much the real estate crisis. This now makes my 3rd big social, economic issue policy proposal. This one however actually has some clients (Credit Unions), but it is still just a demo of my work. If you like my brand of thinking and think I maybe of some service to your group, please let me know. Til then, peruse this latest work. I would love to have your thoughts on it.
Distant Fan
Raghu
On Wed, 12/17/08, Gene Healy wrote:
From: Gene Healy Subject: Out of Office AutoReply: The Radha Group
To: "Raghu John" Date: Wednesday, December 17, 2008, 6:24 PM
I am out of the office on vacation this week. I will be checking email
periodically.
Gene Healy
Vice President
Cato Institute
Check out my new book, The Cult of the Presidency:
"[R]hetorical-and related-excesses are inherent in the modern presidency.
This is so for reasons brilliantly explored in the year's most pertinent and sobering public affairs book, "The Cult of the Presidency: America's Dangerous Devotion to Executive Power," by Gene Healy of Washington's
libertarian Cato Institute."
--George F. Will, Newsweek, June 2, 2008
*&* ` *Contact Obama’s: http://change.gov* *&*
--- On Sat, 12/20/08, Raghu John wrote:
From: Raghu John Subject: Re: The Radha Group
To: "Nori Muster" < n*****@********>
Date: Saturday, December 20, 2008, 12:22 AM
Ditto to both. How do we follow along if they have chosen our ideas?
--- On Thu, 12/18/08, Nori Muster < n*****@********> wrote:
From: Nori Muster < n*****@********>
Subject: Re: The Radha Group
To: ssriraghu@yahoo.com
Date: Thursday, December 18, 2008, 11:17 PM
Instead of waiting for them to respond, let's see if they mention any of our ideas. Our good ideas have a way of working their way through. Also, a good idea comes to many people at the same time, so we must pray that the right people get our ideas and put them to work.
One thing for certain, we have shifted from a "wealth as status" society to one that has been burned by our advisors, our banks, our government. Everybody wants honesty and transparency now.
That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.
On Dec 18, 2008, at 12:45 PM, Raghu John wrote:
I did it. We will see what they think if they responed at all.
I'll keep you updated.
Happy Holidays
On Thu, 12/18/08, Nori Muster < n*****@********> wrote:
From: Nori Muster Subject: Re: The Radha Group
To: ssriraghu@yahoo.com
Date: Thursday, December 18, 2008, 11:12 AM
Hi Raghu,
My suggestion is to go to http://change.gov, then click down the menu, "American Moment," and click on "share your vision." I suggest you put your idea in there. Then click under "jobs" and apply for a job. Not that they're going to hire me (probably), but I am on their list. I have shared my vision about health care (prevention, detoxification, lifestyle changes) and other things.
Keep it up, you are a lot smarter than the people who currently control things.
Nori
*&* *Marketing & Software* *&*
--- On Mon, 12/22/08, Raghu John wrote:
From: Raghu John Subject: What role for you
To: "SN-SG******" < info@*******.com >
Date: Monday, December 22, 2008, 2:36 PM
Your quarterly lease deal for the software is a new consideration. We did discuss this concept of a software program/spreadsheet/forms that would also keep tallies of how many times/deals it was used. The concern was that the mortgage process is so easy to duplicate that there is really no need for a bank or mortgage company to use our software and unlikely that most would given that it would take extra work for them to interface it with their own systems. So though the program is patented and enforceable, sidestepping the programs tools is easy. Therefore, the most effective way around this is to sign the contract based upon the total number of properties with outstanding distressed homes and then ask for a set price against that general number in the beginning.
I love your figures here of 3% to 6% and think there is a good case to be made against 5% of the savings but that has more to do with the caliber of your sales agents and track record we can start from. As you said, we will have those claims once we have done these properties in FL. Until then, we don't have the resources to build out our soft ware not the track record to start with such a strong position to negotiate. Hopefully, that will be resolved within the next 30 to 60 days.
At what point of the development would you see yourself stepping in and in what capacity?
Raghu
On Sun, 12/21/08, info@*******.com < info@*******.com > wrote:
From: info@*******.com < info@*******.com >
Subject: RE: How would you market it
To: ssriraghu@yahoo.com
Date: Sunday, December 21, 2008, 9:30 PM
Replace the same sentence below with the following: You could then get
revenue from royalties for the patented financial system -- per deal, and
this can also be considered the realtor's percentage -- plus quarterly
lease fees for the software.
-------------------
I was thinking of a similar consultant plan, but that assumes that you have a team of trained consultants to visit the banks. If you have this, or if you want to do that yourself, fine, but I don't see why would you charge so little for the consultancy fee.
Brokers generally get 3% - 6%, usually weighted to the higher end. I don't know how much you could save the bank per standard deal, but one option would be to charge a realtor's percentage of the savings realized beyond the standard deal. IOW, if you are are providing a savings of $50,000 to the bank on a deal -- which is money that they would not normally be getting anyway -- you could contract for 5% of those extra savings. To them it is just 5% of the unexpected cream anyway,so there should be little argument.
You have to protect the process from illegal duplication however, but the patent should do that.
Once you prove to a bank how this financial system has already worked in Florida, then you could provide the bank with a solid, audit-tackable, custom software package that figures it all out for them and they just plug in the specifics. You could then get revenue from both royalties for the patented financial system -- per deal -- plus quarterly lease fees for the software.
What do you think.
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Raghu John ssriraghu@yahoo.com
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 17:10:53 -0800 (PST)
To: info@*******.com
Subject: How would you market it
We are trying to figure out how to charge and what to charge for. The most immidiate way to introduce this as a consultantcy service for banks with
distressed properties and to charge more as a realtor/consultant rather then just for the price of using the product so we can therefore charge a
percentage that is more reflective of realtor fees over a product one which would likely be 90% less over the brokers commission. We are still working
out how to set this up. The issue is that there are somany ways to go about doing rather then a limit on how we can so that is the exciting new.
I'm talking with a new account that has about 200 properties in FL. We will see if we can move between 70% to 90% of those within the next couple
months. I would like to charge between; $200 to $500 per home as a real estate broker consultant rather then just handing off the system to him to use. If this goes through, we can go national. It could take about 2 months to do it so should know by Feb. or March were we stand and how exactly it would work as a product & company.
How do you see you would try an use/market it.
--- On Sun, 12/21/08, info@*******.com
< info@*******.com> wrote:
From: info@*******.com < info@*******.com>
Subject: Re: The Radha Group
To: ssriraghu@yahoo.com
Date: Sunday, December 21, 2008, 7:43 AM
HK -- the obvious ? -- Will you make something off of the product?� Happy
New Life...
ys
*****
*&* *Florida Real Estate Investor & Doctors Support* *&
To DW & DGd
Made a summary presentation to Navin. He recognizes it s advantages to distressed homeowners and banks and so is interested in moving forward with this in some capacity. This is one of our first real estate investor accounts. Florida would be a great place to start. We should have a better idea of how quickly we can proceed within the next week or so.
More then,
Yours
Raghu
--- On Mon, 12/22/08, DW wrote:
From: DW Subject: Re: The Radha Group
To: ssriraghu@yahoo.com
Date: Monday, December 22, 2008, 10:01 AM
December 22, 2008
Dear Raghu, I appreciate your letter very much. I wish you success in your important endeavors and projects. Let's be in communication. I'll be glad to be regularly updated on what's happening with you and your efforts. With support and encouragement,
DGd*****
----- Original Message -----
From: Raghu John
To:DDW*******
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 12:19 AM
Subject: Re: The Radha Group
There are many people who can do what needs to be done here, but you pretty much are the only person who can do what you are doing. I don't think its possible to compete with your service at this point. It was more about providing a channel into the higher ends of the financial circles and create the validity to introduce new social economic considerations. This may be my purpose, but question if it s yours. As time goes on, we can see if there is something in this project that inspires you. Until then, your encouragement and service are a great inspiration. I'll keep you updated with the progress and if something catches your attention, let me know. The idea of having a (person) of your caliber to interface with higher end players seemed like a unique (sharing) opportunity but not if it is at the expense of something so extraordinary and rare like you are doing. Thank you for offering this service.
Raghu
On Fri, 12/19/08, DW wrote:
From: DB**** Subject: Re: The Radha Group
To: ssriraghu@yahoo.com
Date: Friday, December 19, 2008, 11:25 AM
DBW, Ph.D., L.C.S.W.
Satvatove Institute
P.O. Box **** A****, Florida 32616
Tel: 386-*******
www.Satvatove.com; www.Satvatove.org
December 19, 2008
Dear Raghu, … I am glad to receive your letter. Also, I did receive your voice mail message a few days ago. It is encouraging to hear about the developments in this exciting project that you are inspiring. I am doing well. Last week I conducted a 6-day Satvatove Advanced Seminar Experience here in Alachua, with participants ranging in age from 21-75. Several …youth were in the course, and also serving on staff. The next seminars I am scheduled to teach are in Switzerland in February, from Feb. 6-16. Also I am doing a lot of (youth) ….-based coaching and coach and facilitator training, as well as writing. Perhaps you've seen the book I published earlier this year, Relationships That Work: The Power of Conscious Living- How Transformative Communication Can Change Your Life. At the end of this posting I am including some comments on that book, which is available at www.Satvatove.com, www.Satvatove.org, and Amazon.com (http://www.amazon.com/Relationships-that-Work-Conscious-Living/dp/1601090153/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1229701172&sr=8-1).
"How far along do you need things to be before you would consider getting invovled?" That depends on the level of involvement we are speaking about. I am here to support and encourage you. My life is filled with activities that I consider vitally important to fulfilling my life purpose, and in creating an auspicious impact on the world. To divert from what I am doing and devote significant time to something else, I would need to be convinced that such a shift is what I am meant to do.
I wish you well, and will be glad to hear from you soon.
Sincerely,
DG****
*&* *The Personal Toll* *&*
--- On Wed, 12/17/08, Raghu John wrote:
From: Raghu John Subject: Re: The RADHA Group
To: AC******@******.com
Date: Wednesday, December 17, 2008, 5:58 PM
Great to hear from you Arnold.
Boy has it been hell. Lost my marriage. All my credit cards are canceled now, $60,000 in debt and a month over due on my rent, 1 of my 2 phones shut off and being evicted out end of the month, but it was all worth (accept losing my wife and kid which I may still get back if this blooms) if this thing finally takes off.
We finally have all the pieces in place and so its now only a mater of time as it makes it way out to the world and up the social financial latter.
As for you, look it over and see what things come to mind and then let me know what you think can be done with it and then what you need in order to do that and then come up with a plan of action from there. I've seen a couple guys on Cspan and in the news from the Manhattan Project Foundation. You can forward it to guys like that for example til we get more resources.
I know that the CEO of the CU was talking about providing some partnership equity share to those that can land accounts so there is both a commission base and partnership incentive already being talked about for people who can land some accounts. As more companies and institutions sign on, we will have more resources and so may wait til that point to provide you with the resources you need to move forward with this.
Let me know what you see for this by way of market and cost.
Subject: Re: The RADHA Group
To: ssriraghu@yahoo.com
Date: Wednesday, December 17, 2008, 4:03 PM
Looks like you've made a lot of progress...congratulations !
