2018 start

[Alan Mendelson]

I have mortgage companies that will give you a mortgage based only on the cash flow shown by your bank deposits. That's a totally different kind of loan program And something a business owner or self employed person might use.

That had nothing to do with the issue of tax returns. If you are submitting tax returns they will be verified, just as banks will verify your checking account statements if that's the loan program you are applying for.

There are ways for a gambler to get a mortgage and again the easiest way is with a substantial down payment for a "non qualifying loan" which simply means there is enough equity in the house that the lender will assume the risk you won't go into foreclosure.

It works with car loans too. If you have no credit but put down a big down payment of 50% anyone will sell you a car.

[LarryS]

Girl Friday

that sounds reasonable and true. I have no doubt that without other collateral that a bank would not accept tax returns from gambling as the prime reason to give the go ahead for handing over hundreds of thousands of dollars.Even if god came down to verify the accuracy of the returns.

Even if the returns are verifiable....there is every reason to believe that all gamblers can go ion extended losing streaks, where unlike someone who loses their job..the gambler not only has no income coming in...but they are losing money on top of having to pay all their regular expenses.

Every bank gambles to a certain extent that based on expected income and cash reserves, and attachable assets and downpayment...that they will get their money. But banks in the end dont want to own your home...they rather not even get in that positions. They dont want to have to go through lawyers and courts. So what you say rings true.

I also believe that KJ makes consistent money from gambling, and I also believe he got a mortgage. But I dont know all the background behind the scenes assets or income between him and his husband. And its none of my business.

I totally believe you when you say that if there is verifiable 5 years worth of income from a gambler, no one in their right mind would lend them money just based on that. I wouldnt even for 10 percent interest. but accumulated assets like IRAs, or annuities which can be liquidated in case of emergency, and the collection of monthly benefits, along with a sizeable down payment might makes the decision easier.

the thing about gamblers is that they can show the bank that they have 100k in the bank.....but in a few months that can be cut in half based on work related events. Because the money in the bank is not sitting there for a rainy day like people getting pay checks....its sitting there to possibly be lost at "work"

[MisterV]

Casinos rely on bank records when determining whether to extend a line of credit, and if so, in what amount, so yeah, bank records account for something.

[Alan Mendelson]

http://alanbestbuys.com/id430.html

One of my clients. He does mortgages based on stated income, on bank deposits, on cash flow. Be prepared for a higher rate. There are also hard money lenders.

Banks only offer a slice of the products available.

But the bottom line is if you think your tax returns are not verified you're dreaming. Everything is verified. But put down a big deposit and mortgage lenders will gladly do business with a gambler. Just don't claim you have EV DOLLARS because they live in the real world. LOL

[regnis]

I have had a line of credit forever. However, when I was playing craps for a living, one day when I asked for a marker I was denied. I went to the credit office and they had done their annual review and I had changed banks so they found the account I previously had was closed.

So I had to fill out a new app. Problem where it asked employment I didn't want to put Gambler so I put retired. I had to give them not only my bank account but some brokerage as well to reinstate the line of credit. Of course, I then changed brokerage as well as I don't like them knowing too much.

[LarryS]

I have mortgage companies that will give you a mortgage based only on the cash flow shown by your bank deposits. That's a totally different kind of loan program And something a business owner or self employed person might use.

That had nothing to do with the issue of tax returns. If you are submitting tax returns they will be verified, just as banks will verify your checking account statements if that's the loan program you are applying for.

There are ways for a gambler to get a mortgage and again the easiest way is with a substantial down payment for a "non qualifying loan" which simply means there is enough equity in the house that the lender will assume the risk you won't go into foreclosure.

It works with car loans too. If you have no credit but put down a big down payment of 50% anyone will sell you a car.

true and you have to be willing in that situation to be paying extra high interest rates.

no credit and poor credit people have higher rates of default,,,and that is taken into account in rates

My parents had a furniture store in a poor neighborhood when i was a kid....and they financed the sales. The finance charges were sky high. Not because they loved to fuck with the poor people.....but because doctors, lawyers, donald trump.....did not walk into the store to buy furniture. So there was just a pool of poor people...and hence a higher rate of default. So someone has to pay for that.

Same with the mortgage companies and car dealerships that will give you the loan with just a large downpayment.......are charging you extra for that.

I am going to go out on a limb, and guess....having no expertise in this field....that a full time gambler or a full time walmart cashier, or full time warehouse worker or full time nurse who put down 40 percent in order to get non qualifying loan is paying a higher percentage than someone who opens their books and has proper assets documented that satisfy getting lower rates at other estyablishments.

you can get anything for a price.

[MisterV]

So then, to conclude: the question was whether a bank would make a mortgage based on EV.

The answer: yes, although it would likely be a "nonqualifying" loan.

Whatever.

[The Boz]

Why? Because Mr Boz claimed I created the $900 an hour figure while all I did was use the math for your return for one minute. Go back in this thread and read the exchange. I am well aware that no matter what I say I will be challenged. Even when I agree with MisterV for example about DI schools even he challenges me.

Not only is the one minute play worth an average $15 profit but I bet only one nickel at a time for an average of 36 spins. The cost to spin the play off is 13 coins (65 cents) but the return is about $16 so about a $15 profit per play. Moneywise it's the smallest play I have. I exploit a dozen different games in Montana. But percentagewise it's the biggest play I have. A $15 profit on a 65 cent investment. That's a return of 2300% for one minute.

Excellent. Mr Boz did you see this?

Yes I did. But I don’t see it the way you did. I believe even though you didn’t say it, you were trying to make a point about the play as BS.

Mickey made it clear that isn’t a play can’t play consistently.

[Alan Mendelson]

So then, to conclude: the question was whether a bank would make a mortgage based on EV.

The answer: yes, although it would likely be a "nonqualifying" loan.

Whatever.

No. EV is not real money. But if you have enough real money either going into a bank account or made as a down payment you as a gambler could get a loan. EV is nothing more than a wish and a hope. Drop it already.

[Alan Mendelson]

Not only is the one minute play worth an average $15 profit but I bet only one nickel at a time for an average of 36 spins. The cost to spin the play off is 13 coins (65 cents) but the return is about $16 so about a $15 profit per play. Moneywise it's the smallest play I have. I exploit a dozen different games in Montana. But percentagewise it's the biggest play I have. A $15 profit on a 65 cent investment. That's a return of 2300% for one minute.

Excellent. Mr Boz did you see this?

Yes I did. But I don’t see it the way you did. I believe even though you didn’t say it, you were trying to make a point about the play as BS.

Mickey made it clear that isn’t a play can’t play consistently.

I didn't say anything about it being BS. That's you attacking me which is Par for the course here. I just wanted Mickey to confirm and HE DID.

Now my only question is, why stop?

[jbjb]

So then, to conclude: the question was whether a bank would make a mortgage based on EV.

The answer: yes, although it would likely be a "nonqualifying" loan.

Whatever.

No. EV is not real money. But if you have enough real money either going into a bank account or made as a down payment you as a gambler could get a loan. EV is nothing more than a wish and a hope. Drop it already.

Yeah....no idea how casinos survived this long with their +EV.

[Bill Yung]

Yeah....no idea how casinos survived this long with their +EV.

To know who survived is to know who had a good thing going. Hindsight. Positive expectation even over the long run doesn't guarantee anything.

[jbjb]

Yeah....no idea how casinos survived this long with their +EV.

To know who survived is to know who had a good thing going. Hindsight. Positive expectation even over the long run doesn't guarantee anything.

The one that fail, fail for other reasons. NOT because they were losing in the gaming department.

[Alan Mendelson]

Jbjb are you really this stubborn and stupid? Do you understand that EV is not real money but a casino and a player will use EV to forecast their return? It's reallysimple: they are separate. You can't substitute EV for actual money. Now keep searching for abandoned multipliers.

[MisterV]

Obviously a gambler cannot offer to repay a loan with EV, that is not the point.

The point is that an AP playing with +EV can and often does earn enough money from AP to qualify for a loan, without showing a W-2.

[mickeycrimm]

Excellent. Mr Boz did you see this?

Yes I did. But I don’t see it the way you did. I believe even though you didn’t say it, you were trying to make a point about the play as BS.

Mickey made it clear that isn’t a play can’t play consistently.

I didn't say anything about it being BS. That's you attacking me which is Par for the course here. I just wanted Mickey to confirm and HE DID.

Now my only question is, why stop?

What does this question "why stop?" mean?

[The Boz]

Excellent. Mr Boz did you see this?

Yes I did. But I don’t see it the way you did. I believe even though you didn’t say it, you were trying to make a point about the play as BS.

Mickey made it clear that isn’t a play can’t play consistently.

I didn't say anything about it being BS. That's you attacking me which is Par for the course here. I just wanted Mickey to confirm and HE DID.

Now my only question is, why stop?

I don’t see it as attacking but we can disagree. You make it easy based on your views and wanting to argue everything. You can say what you did was just his words but there is no doubt you putting KJ’s post in your signature is a tweak at him.

[Alan Mendelson]

Obviously a gambler cannot offer to repay a loan with EV, that is not the point.

The point is that an AP playing with +EV can and often does earn enough money from AP to qualify for a loan, without showing a W-2.

Anybody with money can qualify for a loan.

[Alan Mendelson]

Yes I did. But I don’t see it the way you did. I believe even though you didn’t say it, you were trying to make a point about the play as BS.

Mickey made it clear that isn’t a play can’t play consistently.

I didn't say anything about it being BS. That's you attacking me which is Par for the course here. I just wanted Mickey to confirm and HE DID.

Now my only question is, why stop?

What does this question "why stop?" mean?

I ask why stop because you've hit on a gold mine: $15 a minute or $900 an hour.

[girlfriday]

Glad to be back and see such a discussion, however flighty and off topic it may be. But I'll address everything I've seen. I was an actuary at an insurance company prior to joining B of A, so I believe I understand the math dialogue in these discussions.

When someone files a loan app as a professional gambler without any other income source going forward, no matter if he or she argues that they are an ap with big ev promised, no loan ever gets approved on that alone. To the gentleman who asserted that applying as a pro gambler is no different than anyone who files as self-employed, you are mistaken. If a self employed person shows business and income stability, then it would safely be assumed his income would continue going forward because it is a business with real revenue, meaning real income. A gambler would expect to secure a loan based on things going his or her way and not the casino's way, thereby leaving future income up to chance. That means an automatic denial. As I mentioned, a steady, real income source in addition to expected gambling income would be required in other to have any chance at securing a home loan. Those are typically tough in their own right, and for obvious reasons. One more point to remember, loan officers and underwriters are like most business people, irs auditors, and so forth. They don't believe anyone wins on a consistent basis gambling. Anyone. So that's what you're up against from the start of the process.

Now I'd like to address this issue revolving around the theory of EV. I believe we all can agree that EV represents something expected, but not certain, in the future, and it is never actual money right now. I did read about the person who said they had the best EV day in a whole, but unfortunately they list $8k at the same time. There us something to that, but in large part, it does not pass the reality check.

For instance, I believe I play blackjack with a very slight edge. Always. But if I play for 11 hours today and lose money, the +ev I went in with, even though it was injected with a dose of hope, means nothing for future sessions. I believe the person who said it was a good thing is only trying to make him/herself feel better about the loss. Yes, the person can proclaim their having hours of positive expectation as something great, but as far as future gambling sessions are concerned, the same thing could happen time and time again. +EV can in fact have a negative cash flow value attached to it. The good and positive expectation never has, had, or is meant to have any real monetary value attached. If you understood the intricacies of whole life and term insurance policies and their differences, you'd understand what I'm trying to explain.

I'll try to get to playing blackjack and some of the comments I've read here about it. My knowledge is good, but probably nowhere near some of the experts here.