|
|
 |
|
| |
|
|
| |
by Sid Cameron
|
|
print article · comment on article
|
|
| |
previous |
page 3 of 4 |
next |
|
| |
|
|
| |
ies tied to a bank will undoubtedly mean an increase in overall expenses to the consumer. How? By supplying all the services you need to buy a home, the banks would be able to reduce the competition the consumer could get in areas like finance and insurance. Real Estate basically becomes a bank’s way to capture your business in much the same fashion as buying a photocopy machine locks you into buying toner and supplies from the company that made the photocopier.
Although there would be laws prohibiting a bank from “requiring” a home buyer to use only the bank’s services, there could be extreme pressure put on an agents to deliver a portfolio of services to their buyer. Since many consumers rely on their agent to line up financing for them, they could be lulled into higher rates and greater fees. Think about this, since the banks began merging a few years ago, what has happened to free checking, free ATM use, and other formerly free services at your national banks?
However to see the biggest threat to the average Joe from a real estate/banking merger you only have to look at the Savings and Loan crisis from the 1980’s. The Savings and Loans went wild in the real estate industry writing one bad loan after another in an attempt to grab more sales. In the end it cost tax payers Billions to bail them out.
About The Author
Sid Cameron currently works for the STLagent Team of Real Estate Professionals in St Louis, MO. His website is
http://www.stlagent.com
Sid |
|
| |
|
|
| |
previous |
1·2·3·4 |
next |
|
|
