Character and Personality Matter In Sub2 Negotiations...

Put on a happy face...

Have you ever been fed up with rejections on your offers, or received lame reasons for having your offer rejected?

Has it ever occurred that the seller just didn’t like you, or worse; didn’t trust you?

While getting meaningful concessions out of a seller, Barney Zick once suggested that building both rapport and a relationship with a seller, if we want terrific terms on real estate, was an indispensable element in the negotiations.

About four years ago, I heard John $Cash$ Locke say, “People will listen to you if they like you. They’ll do business with you if they trust you.”

Frankly, I used to confuse “like” with “trust.” Probably because I would trust someone only because I liked them. That’s bad judgment of course, but I learned the hard way.

Meantime, con men depend on that confusion and lack of sophistication to take advantage of people. Americans in general are suckers for confusing a friendly personality with a trustworthy character. It’s a wonder that more people don't buy tire chains for a trip to Death Valley in August if the salesman is successful at making them feel good about it.

As professional negotiators, we may find prospects that confuse good personalities with good character.

I called a real estate agent about his property. He told me that he was desperate to sell, but jokingly informed me that he wasn’t “some unsophisticated dipsh-t that wrote with crayons.” We both laughed, but I got his point.

He was telling me that he was looking to deal, but wasn’t prepared to give away the farm. He disarmed me by being likable, but also let me know the limits, so that we weren't taking up each other's time on an unworkable objective; that was me stealing his property, and him giving up the farm...

Well, he really wasn’t giving away the farm, and so I didn’t get my steal. But those extremes are for amateurs, not pros. However, I had a good feeling toward the agent that day and I looked forward to listing one of my properties with him when it was time to sell. Why?

Because he was likable, and showed me that he could communicate with character. He didn’t lie to me, or lead me on a goose chase and waste my time. That agent was one of the most successful in the area.

I think it’s because he knew how to be likable and trustworthy.

When we’re looking for deals where the seller is going to be participating with the financing for any length of time, doesn’t it makes sense to make friends, build rapport and create trust?

If not, we’ll turn our negotiations into battles; turn win/win into win/lose; and fail to capture the juicy deals that only come after the prospect lets his guard down.

Now, some investors don’t learn this until they run out of money or credit.

If we’ve been practicing in the “blow in, blow off, and blow out” method of deal making, then we’ll be incredibly rusty when it comes to negotiating the cream puff deals that require rapport and trust to get the seller to participate in long term financing schemes ...and in order to make the big bucks in this Sub2 business .

I say, "Start now with a charming personality and winning character."

The Big Sub2 Stick...

It has occurred to me that too many creative investors really aren't that "creative" at all, in the usual sense.

Once, creative investors defined themselves by looking beyond the obvious (thus creative) to find profitable ways to make money in real estate that traditional (non-creative) investors might look passed.

Subsequently, the creative investor found ways to make even more money during the holding time, that the average investor wouldn't consider. Let's look at "seller financing" as an exit strategy. "Ugh!, says the traditional investor, whose only exit strategy is buy/hold/sell for cash.

Yes, seller financing is considered the red-headed step-child of exit strategies for traditional investors. Nobody wants to look at it, or claim it as their own, because to the traditional wholesaler, flipper, or merchandiser, this represents a failure to perform...

That is, the objective of the traditional investor/flipper is to buy for cash and immediately sell higher for cash. So having to finance a sale, is like saying, “Mommy, I did a boo-boo, please spank me...” Okay, maybe that’s just me... :)

The old way of flipping works fine until there's a hiccup in financing, appraisals, or inspections that make the property unsellable for the "right price". Then "Plan B" goes into play...or, "Plan C'... or, "Plan D'..., or Oh, crap, not the "Last Resort Plan?" Yes, seller financing. This exit strategy just represents a "muck up" if you will of the original plan to “get out fast for cash.”

For the Sub2 investor whom isn't bound to traditional liquidation methods, "seller financing" is "Plan A", not the “Oh, crap!” plan." Before I go further, one of the biggest sticking points about the “Oh, crap!” plan of seller financing is the risk of default by a buyer.

The average investor fears the "liar loan squat." That is, the buyer stops paying and won't move, and forces the investor to cover the payments on his own investment situation. This is what the amateurs sweat, twitch over, and dread and dread, as if it were a diagnosis of terminal cancer, or permanent head injury (just to make it vivid).

Yawn...this only happens to amateurs who don’t know how to limit risk with the “Big Stick.”

For the professional Sub2 flipper, “liar loan squatters” are some faint anecdotal thing that happens to others. At the same time, those who inform themselves on how to limit the risk using the “Big Stick” make consistent, huge money in less time than the average investor does.

Meantime, the profits on a Sub2 deal, that appear at face-value to hover between "average and 'don't do it'," are substantial. And of course, the profits can be unbelievable on Sub2 deals that hover between "dreamy and heavenly".

However, limiting risk, is only the beginning of the profits. The juicy profits are in these five words: “Down Payments. Rinse And Repeat.” That just means knowing how to find buyers with down payments, and when/if a default occurs, elegantly moving in another buyer who can "hopefully pay", but nonetheless has ANOTHER down payment. Yay, for repeat seller financing and multiple down payments...!

Frankly, I'm only talking about seller financing of marketable homes that "everybody" would like to own...not the 45-year old, stucco boxes with one-car garages, gravel roofs, and wall heaters (I've owned many of those). Who wants to buy one of those and put up a bunch of money...? Nobody. That's why the government invented low-income, no down, HUD loans, so buyers with no taste (j/k) can buy these unmarketable, ugly, obsolete hovels that nobody wants (after making sellers do all sorts of retrogrades to make them "habitable" and financeable).

So, what is the “Big Stick?” you might ask...? Hmmm?

You can find the "Big Stick" in my Sub2 investing course I call... ( Click Here )

"Honey, I Found A Sub2 Sucker...!"

I've been offered some bizarre sub2 deals. One lady had several rentals to get rid of that she was ready to walk away from. I didn't know why she would walk away, but they were all over-financed by a large margin.

Sometimes, upside down deals can be worth "messing" with, if there's no time limit to refinance the loans, and the existing financing is stable. That is, the loans are not "neg ams" negative amortizations, interest only, or adjustable loans with high interest caps, and the like.

When the principal keeps going up, and the income doesn't...trouble happens. When the payment goes up and the value doesn't...trouble also happens. Anytime, the payment structure is unpredictable or likely to get out of control...trouble happens...for those that, without thinking things out, do these deals against all better judgment.

Well, when I found out what her payments were, I thought, "This was either the worst terms ever, or the best ones ever. She was $200,000 underwater (over-leveraged) with her loans, but her rents covered her payments.

Well, after talking with her I discovered the most amazing thing... And it wasn't what I expected...

She had pulled a quarter million out of these properties two years previous, then the market tanked, and finally she was left with a quarter million in the bank, and upside down by the same amount. Of course, I'm kidding... She didn't have squat in the bank...left. Like many amateur investors who accidentally "hit a jackpot" in real estate timing, she blew the money on...whatever...!

Okay, whats this have to do with "a Sub2 sucker deal"...?

Well, despite the common misconception, not every seller writes with crayons that gets themselves in a crack with real estate and is willing to do a Sub2 deal with us. Some sellers are quite sophisticated. Meantime, it's up to us to figure out which deals are worth a hoot, and which ones just make us "look" like we write with crayons in the aftermath of a deal gone terribly wrong.

That all said, let's take a look at a good deal and then compare with some bad ones...
Good deal...

• Seller has one or two loans that total 90% loan-to-value, or less (or 10% equity remaining, or more).
• Seller needs out of the payments/situation "yesterday"
• Seller has "gone through" at least one failed escrow and perhaps two real estate agents.
• Seller has a fully amortized, fixed rate, or reasonably-capped ARM loan, with no balloon payments coming due.
• Seller needs to salvage/maintain/improve his credit.
• Seller needs/wants to qualify to buy a cheaper/different home.

When the stars line up, we've got a good deal. Now, here's the anatomy of a "bad" deal from a "good" prospect.

• Seller has one or two loans that total over 100% loan-to-value, or more (or no equity remaining).
• Seller needs out of the payments/situation "yesterday" and can only short sale, default, or modify the financing .... and screw his credit...
  
• Seller can't list his house conventionally, because he'll have to pay out of pocket for the closing and real estate costs..
• Seller has a fully amortized ARM loan with higher interest payments, high cap on the interest and a balloon payment due (all of which will torpedo this deal).
• Seller needs to salvage/maintain/improve his credit (He's screwed).
  
• Seller needs/wants to qualify to buy a cheaper/different home ( His option used to be to, "buy and bail," until last year, when banks got wind of this tactic ). That is, the seller maintains his credit, buys another house, cheap, and then lets his old house "go back to the bank" (maybe the same one that made him the new loan...! heheheh.

To recap: Good deals:

1. Motivated seller who writes with crayons (just kidding) and has burned through a couple agents and failed escrows.
   
2. Low interest rate loans with no balloons or adjustments.
3. At least 10% equity.
4. Wants to buy another house immediately.
   

Bad deals:

1. Motivates seller who writes with crayons (just kidding, again!)
2. Teaser rates, high rates, negative amortizations, high interest caps, early payoff dates.
3. No equity, or upside down.
4. Dreams of buying another house sometime before the "rapture"
   

Sub2 And Multifamily Income Property

I'm in the throws of "master lease option" negotiations on two mid-sized apartment buildings in California.

One building has low rents and the other has missing rents. One seller wanted to know what happens to his credit if I missed a rent payment. The other one objected that I was making no guarantee that I would refinance before his loan came due.

These are great objections, because once they are met, then we get that much closer to a deal.

There's more.

I've re-learned never to negotiate over the phone. I was sandbagged on the phone two days ago by a seller who insisted they I tell him what I was going to offer him right then.

This was my second phone conversation. The first time I talked with him, I mentioned the out of state units that are presently master leased. He didn't flinch. However, this time, he was impatient to literally tell me to "go to....(a hot place down under), if I was going to suggest a master lease with him!"

Well, I'm used to flat rejections, but this is a time to remember that telling a seller over the phone what you want to do without first putting something in writing is a mistake. We need to make the offer in writing first (even if it's a letter of intent), and at worst followup on the phone after first submitting something in writing (with all the objections handled in writing).

It's all about the order of things.

Interestingly, I'm still gathering up potential objections to study. So the worse the seller's attitude is, the more I'm gathering ammo for my next "objection-meeting" presentation. The question I'm asking myself today is what my limit is on the security deposits? My thought was to offer only one or two month's worth of mortgage payments.

However, this one project is so underwater, that any money I give the seller is just money I can't use to cosmetically upgrade the project, keep it current, and make it more marketable. Hmmm.

Meanwhile, I'm sending out more letters this week to the same group of sellers I found online, and in my driving two months ago. Anybody care to give me advice here?

Meanwhile if you would like to know more about taking over loans, getting the title, without credit or cash, click this sentence.

"Ugly Sub2 Coughs Up $26,000 in 18 Months...!"

This house is going to cough up $26,000 in rents over the next 18 months.

Meanwhile, we found this house after two hours of driving our farm area and taking down addresses of vacant and abandoned property.

I researched this property and found out the owner lived close by. The property is in default, but not scheduled for a trustee sale.

It's been vacant since last Fall.

Now all this information helped me know how to pitch the seller. The fact that the seller wasn't even trying to rent out the house tells me this seller was tired of dealing with it and out of options.

Well this house is a great candidate for a loan mod and/or a short sale. The property is in terrible shape outside, and needs a cosmetic overhaul inside. Flooring, paint, some hardware replacement, and built-in appliance installation(s). Then there's landscaping overhaul (cleanup, trimming and watering). Total estimate $3,500 (less if we don't replace the flooring).

Market rents are $1.00 per square foot or $1,460 a month with 1,460 square feet of rent-able space, not including the garage.

While we rent the house out, we'll work with the owner to modify the loan, or short it. The 2nd will get about $3,000, and the first will be reduced by $30,000 for a total encumbrance of $90,000. Plenty of room for profit with a sale of $158,000 to a credit challenged buyer.

Meanwhile, our rent of $1,460 over 18 months will net us about $26,000. We'll pass on the cost of back taxes to the end user, if our short sale/loan mod is successful, and include it in the sale price. Meanwhile, we've got insurance costs of about $700, and we're paying the buyer a few hundred for granting us title (held unrecorded in escrow, which is our personal safe deposit box), until we can successfully negotiate either the loan mod or short sale.

All this to say, Sub2 profits come after taking action, not sitting around wishing things were easier!

Normally, I would tell you about just the pretty houses we buy, but this proves that money can be made out of something ugly, too!

If you would like to know how we structure deals just like this one, click the link below.

"How To Make $26,000 in 2 Hours...!"

How To Turn A Lemon Into Lemonade!

I just came away from an appointment that I would not normally have made. The seller showed me all the "wanter-itis" "sores" I could stand to look at.

However, ever a masochist and always curious, I wanted to see the cute 1 acre property anyway, and keep my sub2 pitching arm toned up, so I played the interested "wanter" role anyway and asked to see the property today at 9 a.m.

I brought in my credential book ready to "yellow pad" the crap out of the victims, er the sellers, again just to keep my pitching arm toned up.

First I knew they wanted $25,000 up front. Deal killer. They owed $19,000 more on the property than it was worth. They were asking $100,000 more than what is was worth. Really a deal killer. They told me, point blank, they weren't desperate to sell the house. Really, really, really a deal killer. And finally, if this wasn't the straw that broke the camel's back, they wanted their Realtor buddy to be present at my presentation. OK, no really?

Well, upon arrival I discovered that the agent was one I made a verbal offer through two years ago on a pre-foreclosure. I know he was desperate to sell something, but I wasn't seriously interested in that deal either. I let the agent beat the seller up with my low-ball opinion. I know how the game works. I was helping him get a closing. He sold that house for 80k less partly because I gave him ammunition to discourage the seller with. he he.

Wow so now I've got an ally, I hoped. I introduced myself again and then pitched down the center. I showed everyone the examples of houses we buy and sell, and the referral and reference letters, that we support little league and the better business bureau, and offered the "bad news" RE articles, etc.

This was my second time at the property. I already toured the house the day I called, so that part of the presentation was moot. So, we just analyzed the numbers as if, and I outlined all the costs, carrying costs (based on 23 months of inventory! wow), and finally showed them that they would have to cough up $20,000, if they waited for a retail buyer (as if the price weren't $100,000 over retail as it was). Frankly it would take them 10 years to find a buyer for that extra $100,000k in price. Actually, just one day, if they went with me! Who knew?! Lots of laughs.

I informed the sellers that I was there to qualify them for our system of buying and selling (following the "cash now" script/pitch exactly).

During the scripted presentation, I uncovered all sorts of nook and crannies of need. Problematic for me was the wife was a ditz. She couldn't quite comprehend what "take over payments" meant exactly. Argh!

So it was an uphill battle. I digressed from the script in order to come at something the sellers could understand without having to defer to my now agent-buddy.

After explaining that I could make it possible for them to buy a cheaper house in Arizona (and with the agents help in suggesting they could find a "low-down" lender in Arizona), the entire pace of the negotiations picked up speed.

All of the sudden the need for $25,000 as a down payment disappeared, the fear of having to be responsible for repairs disappeared, and the fact that they could get out of the payments on the house, move to a cheaper home with a cheaper mortgage, could enable them to continue paying on their credit cards, and protecting their credit became a genuine solution to them. Who knew?

So again, I suggested two alternatives to the sellers; 1) a lease option (which I only suggested so that I could knock it down), or 2) take over the payments (which I showed all the more benefits of doing as opposed to "renting" their house for 10 years, etc.). It took me a while to explain how this could work as a long term solution to their $100,000 over-pricing.

Here's where you sharpy's might ask, why didn't the "yellow pad" analysis enable me to knock off $100,000? Well, it did. However, I used the analysis to demonstrate that even their over-retail asking price wasn't going to net them anything. And from talking to them, they would rather have an R E O, than let someone equity-strip their perception of equity.

I could see how $400 or $500 extra a month just waiting for a gestation period would be worth my time anyhow, so I met their price, if they were willing to give me my terms. This was the crux of the negotiations.


Well, the couple can't continue paying on $40,000 of credit card debt, AND make their mortgage very much longer (of $287,000) --- and they really want to move to Arizona a.s.a.p., so the hubby can die near relatives.

Meanwhile, they wanted enough out of the deal immediately to pay off the credit cards originally. I said, in not so many words, the best I can do is take over your first mortgage loan, and promise you the extra $100,000 in 120 months. And at this price, I'm not going to put anything down, or pay interest on the extra $100,000, or make credit card payments. And btw, you'll need to leave everything here when you leave so that I can attract a decent buyer willing to pay $100,000 over retail.

They asked the Realtor buddy to confirm what I've said was true, and he backed me up 100%! Who knew?

Bottom line, they want to make sure that if they sell this way, they won't have to come back and fix anything, regardless if they lease option, or sub2, me. I said fine.

And their other concern is that one of them won't live out the 10 years, and will be stuck with the whole credit card bill and have to wait for the remaining $100,000. I said fine. No, just kidding.

I just said I can only one thing here, and give you a silent, no interest 10-year balloon for the extra $100,000.

So, now they're getting back in touch with the mortgage broker in Arizona to see if they can actually buy a "used house" with very little down, and if they can, they said they want to do the deal. That's a far cry from we want $25k, and "What the f--k does 'take over payments' mean!"

What I should have done is had them sign my preliminary Buy Agreement, and then let them do all their due diligence, and then actually force them to cancel our agreement. But, leaving the "printing out a contract" task until eighty thirty this morning, and discovering that my printer server wouldn't recognize the wireless router (which has never happened), I went without being my usually prepared self.

So, after this couple finds out that they can get into a smaller house, with a lower down in Arizona, and still qualify for a loan since they've barely been able to keep their credit card and house payments current --- I believe I can resell this place for a contract price of $390,000 in 10 years, realize a monthly spread on the payments of about $400 a month, with about $15,000 up front.

Just thought I'd share this scheme with you guys. The things that make this work are that the first mortgage has a low fixed interest rate for $1,700 mo. PI which is very marketable; I'm not paying anything on the perceived equity until 2018, and I'm able to get into the deal without any real cash, just notary and recording fees; I'm only paying $1,400 taxes on a 1988 valuation/purchase; and I've got buyers for this thing in the pipeline.

Who knew any of this would be likely had I not made an appointment and made an off-the-cuff offer presentation, on a house I was only curious to use for comparison --- and was otherwise a "loser deal".

Anyone else have a war story they want to share?

I'll let you know what happens when this couple realizes NOBODY else has what I have to offer them.

Trust Me! I'm An Uber Negotiator!

A recurring theme on this blog is the ability to negotiate profitably, if not professionally. I say profitably, rather than successfully, because some folks forget they're negotiating for a profit. Instead they settle for successful negotiations.

So what's the difference?

Roger Dawson and Barney Zick were the first two gurus that introduced me to both negotiating philosophies and resultant gambits.

Barney Zick taught me about "Targeted Negotiations" and how superior this was to generic "win/win" negotiations. In fact, I would be embarrassed if anyone thought I was still negotiating for banal "win/win" transactions.

Anyone who knows, knows that "win/win" is the code word for "trust me" that the amateurs and residential real estate agents use to con the unsophisticated into thinking that they are being served in some altruistic fashion. Agents work for their own best interests. They work for closings and nothing else. Some agents are smoother about it than others, but without closings everybody starves.

Meanwhile, the Uber Negotiators I find are the ones that pull in the big bucks. These are the negotiators that focus 100% on the objective and don't get knocked off the tracks with win/win sob stories of one kind or another that would cause them to lose track of their primary objective which is to make money --- and lots of it.

Recently I heard of an investor who got tangled up in a sob story, and failed to ask for what he wanted in the deal in a professional manner, and ended up failing to close profitably. He confused his objective with that of some humanitarian effort of some stripe.

What's worse the story was relayed to testify to what an honest guy he was --- that his first priority was to "help people," and then passively allow the stars to line up as other party came around to ostensibly forge a profitable deal with him later. Ho hum. It's the old "Trust me. I'm really a nice guy." or the "Karma" approach to negotiations. Puh-leeze!

Been there. Done that.

Win/win is...more often, than not, a con. Or maybe at best its a way to deal with a neurotic guilt trip over actually making a profit off of somebody. Either way, run from anyone who says "Trust me. I'm a great guy! Look what I've given up to help others." The ones that impress me, are the ones that never say what they've done, but let others share the good fortune they've had dealing with that person. This would be called a "referral."

Of course I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't be honest in our dealings with those we do business with. It's a small world out there, and once a person wrecks his reputation by cheating people, or taking "undue" advantage...it just makes doing business that much harder and more expensive --- if he can stay in business.

I like cheap and easy business dealings. So I suggest that we remain honest about what we're about, and not confuse our identities with "frustrated priests." We're in the business to make money, not compete with charities.

To illustrate the otherwise confused mind that some folks allow to occur, let me share a situation that happened several years ago with a family friend.

Our family "bud" had a TV stolen from his motor home. After the police caught up with the thief, our friend was so sympathetic to the crook (with emphasis on pathetic) that he offered to drop charges and offer the burglar the TV to keep "if he really needed one".

The cops told him that was stupid. We told him that he was naive. Everyone told him that he was missing the point of the whole "prosecution" effort. However, our neurotic friend was so motivated to let this crook off the hook, as it were, that he lost all perspective of the situation and essentially undermined law enforcement efforts.

That's exactly what happens when the negotiator takes his focus off of making money, and internalizes a victim's situation to the point where the problem becomes the personal property of the negotiator. When this happens the negotiator begins operating from a position of weakness. He confuses his objectives with that of the prospect. And sabotages his own position.

Now let's consider the opposite...

There are a large number of negotiators that go overboard in their advantage taking. They'll equity strip Grandma Moses, if there's an opportunity. That's not what I'm saying we should do. What I am saying is that it's not a sin to make money. It's honorable if we are acting in good faith, doing what we say we'll do, not making false or empty promises, and keeping our intentions and actions clear and respectable.

Advantage taking, of course, is not a virtue by any account. However, keeping our heads on straight, and not confusing our efforts with some secondary objective is a virtue.

When a client calls me, they already know that I'm an investor. I don't call myself anything other than that. If the prospect doesn't like investors, he won't call me. That's fine. There's a bunch of other crap he won't like either if, for starters, he doesn't like those who negotiate for a profit.

So I say be honest about yourself. Don't lose perspective by internalizing the prospect's problems and fail to negotiate clearly in your own best interest. Remember there's a huge difference between having sympathy and being empathetic. Sympathy will draw you into donating blood. Empathy will motivate you to find blood donors.

Jay

Pitching "all" the "Don't Wanters"

My first attempts at getting sellers to accept my offers were painful, embarrassing efforts. I had a poor pitching arm at the beginning.

I had almost no idea how to present an offer in an elegant, efficient and effective manner. What's worse I failed to understand why it's important to have all of the decision makers present while the offer was being presented, discussed and negotiated.

Few things give a negotiator more of a sinking feeling then to make a smooth presentation, work through tough negotiations, get agreement from all parties, ask them to sign --- only to be told that "Uncle Henry has to review your offer before we sign." "Uh, huh. 'Uncle Henry', you say?"

After a few minutes plummeting into a verbal debate over whether Uncle Henry really has any real authority, blah, blah, blah, I walk out the door with only a polite verbal promise under my arm that, "After Uncle Henry let's us know, we'll let you know --- for sure!"

"Yeah right.", I say to myself, adding, "Next!"

Today I refuse to make a presentation to the sellers until "all the decision makers are present during the presentation".

I get objections anyway that include: "My wife doesn't need to be present, because I make all these types of decisions anyway so just give it to me." [Yeah, sure Bud, whatever. I'll bet she chooses your clothes, too!"] Or, "My husband's out of town on business, so I just relay the offer to him over the phone. [Nah, you've never heard of the word amortization before tonight. I can't imagine how you'll explain "intestate" to him.] Or "I'm the only one on title, so my wife/husband doesn't need to be there". [Really and you've making making all the family decisions for how many days?"]

These are just disqualifying objections as far as I'm concerned. If the seller won't cooperate, then I just move on. I only want to negotiate with desperate anxious sellers that will follow my lead, because they don't know about any viable alternatives. Not ones that believe they have other options and want to weigh ALL of them at my expense.

Of the very most important things that I needed to know about making "hard sell" offers [low-ball offers, sub2, etc.] was that ALL of the decision makers had to be present; husband, wife, and Uncle Henry, or I would wait --- or walk. Without all the decision makers present, the trail that led the negotiations to a closing disappears, and the absent parties can never clearly translate how those negotiations progressed, or how each conclusion was reached, or "why" all the targeted elements of the transaction were satisfactory.

All Uncle Henry hears is that somehow the investor is equity-stripping his nephew and wife, because Uncle Henry didn't get to help "work for the deal" and wasn't led through the "assumed close" --- and didn't hear that the nephew had tried to sell the property through an agent three times in a row, and finally wasn't educated by the "yellow pad" analysis that his relatives were now upside down on the deal in the first place with all the repairs, real estate fees, and closing costs included. So Uncle Henry's operating with blinders on, and meanwhile offering uninformed feedback on the quality of the transaction.

Here's a incomplete list of reasons why all the decision makers must be present for the presentation/negotiations:

• There is no "higher authority" the seller can appeal to. Seller's will say they need to consult someone else, when in fact, they want to shop our offers by going back to Mr. Investor #4 and see if he'll pay more than us.
• We have about 40 minutes to make our presentation, analyze the numbers and look over the house and get the offer approved. If we leave without an accepted offer, we leave without a deal, and the likelihood of ever getting a deal signed is nil --- all because the seller was given the opportunity to consult the phantom higher authority, but in actuality was shopping our offer.
• We need the decision makers to fish or cut bait, because we can't be strung along with too many pending offers at the same time. We make offers on what we can do today, not what we might be able to do a week from today. Things change. Money gets spent. Opportunities rarely present themselves twice. So we need to know now.
• If the seller's insist on the need to think, I offer to go outside on the (back) porch, until they've reached a decision. Of course they want me to leave them alone, but I don't. Meanwhile, I don't go to the front porch, as they may decide never to open the door! j/k! Somehow sellers get a tad "itchy and scratchy" when some guy's out sitting on a lawn chair in their back yard waiting for an answer. This hurries things along in our favor --- either by disqualifying the seller, or seeing them cave to our terms.
  
• If the sellers insist on thinking about my offer overnight, and I know there's no other offers, I might allow this with the caveat that the offer expires at "x" o'clock that evening. And put doubt in their minds about whether I can extend my offer at the current price and terms --- since things change daily in my business.
• I don't want my offers shopped

So correctly "pitching don't wanters" includes making sure you pitch all of them at the same time. Otherwise, it's like pitching with a missing arm! :)