Yes you are correct. Which is pretty much option 2, the numbers on the balance sheet aren’t really correct. More or less. That’s why I included the disclaimer, I haven’t yet had a chance to fully look at the numbers

But let’s assume it’s a 500k mortgage. Up until a few days ago the revenues (rent) where enough to cover the 500k mortgage and give some profit. So what’s happened since? In this case the rent’s no longer being paid in full and that number is totally wrong (which means that a lot of mortgages on their balance sheet are foreclosing, a lot more than they had us believe the week before).

But from my understanding, the mortgage left over on was much less than 500k (in relation). How much, I don’t know, that’s where I haven’t yet had the time to investigate. But my guess is that if $30 billion is enough for the buyout to go through it must be in that range or lower…

You’re analysis is completely correct.

“Now imagine further that you can’t find any buyers for your house, even at $20,000. Yes the house does come with a mortgage that you have to assume, but it’s also being rented and is earning revenues.”

Say that that $600k house has a $500k mortgage on it. If I have to assume the $500k mortgage (i.e. I am taking on a $500k debt), how can it be said that I am buying the house for $20k?

If I was actually paying only $20k for the house, then yes it would be a steal.

If I put “no money down” and simply assume the mortgage, haven’t I just bought the house for $500k fully financed? I still bought it for $500k didn’t I?

Can you clear that up for me? Thanks!