Its really lame for journalist to state cash vs mortgage.. since majority ( up to 99%) RE contract is closed and settled "in cash" vs seller getting a note. So having a buyer be "all cash" or mortgage is irrelevant matter. How the buyer finances a purchase is a matter between Buyer and Banker.
Decades ago did I like everyone else buy their home "all cash"..
yes and I financed it.. without the the interest and knowledge of seller(s).
Typical statement form someone who has no clue... When a buyer with a million dollars in cash makes an offer of $100K on an investment home, nobody thinks they'll pay more just because they have more..
you are not being very honest here.. of course you dont disclose your financial position. whats the point of negotiating if they already know ...
the typical buyer pulled every dime out of their savings and then some...
they were not good negotiations and got taken to the cleaners.
Roberto hit it dead on. There are many times when an all cash offer is the only way to close a deal. Especially right now! Banks are taking forever and forcing people to jump through hoops to get a loan. Get the property into your name with cash, and then work on getting the money back out.
A cash offer with verified funds is a much more sure deal than ANY financed offer.
along with your bank and investment statements, complete list of other assets and a count of you change in your pockets...
its no wonder many were fleeced out of their savings.
it only shows how naive the public has become when buying RE over the past 10-12 years. YOU NEVER tell the other side about your financial well being. That is not for them to know.
this is why you have a lawyer.. to look out for your interest.
Actually, any lawyer with experience in the matter will tell you that proof of funds is an essential component of a cash offer. I do a ton of commercial transactions where (depending upon the type of business, issues with the property, etc.) financing is difficult to get, and cash is king.
However, I have also found that roughly 75% of the time that someone makes a "cash offer" but doesnt provide proof of funds, its because they dont have the cash.
When you inquire why no proof of funds, what usually follows is a parade of excues - "I dont have the cash but I will get it soon" or "I dont have the cash but I have this asset which I will sell for cash (and then half the time they dont do that)" or some other excuse which largely ends up being a waste of time and attorneys fees.
Thus, if I am Buyer's counsel, and my client wants to do cash offer - no proof of funds, I immediately ask why he wants to portray to the other side: "there is a 75% chance I am a liar and I really dont have the cash".
Likewise, if I am Seller's counsel, and his broker brings 3 "all cash" offers and 2 of them do not provide proof of funds, I tell my client there is a very good chance these 2 guys are liars and (unless they can prove funds ASAP) go with the third who has already demonstrated he has the funds and is serious about moving forward.