A client once told me about an argument she had with her business partner, which resulted in my client stomping off in frustration. The partner chased my client down and said, “Hey, where are you going?” My client responded, “You’re being stubborn and not listening to me.” The partner responded with, “I was just debating the issue. If we always agree, one of us isn’t necessary.” This has become somewhat of a mantra to me.

Nothing refreshes me more than someone disagreeing with me and then justifying why. I recently wrote a blog about the true definition of an “All Cash” transaction. I got the following e-mail from a valued client, David Burciaga of Bertsch Properties. I’m making it my current blog (thanks, David for agreeing) so that anyone following can get someone else’s perspective.

Here’s David’s email to me:

I started receiving your newsletters and blog posts, which I enjoy reading. I also enjoyed hearing you speak at the last two LPBA forums. Your most recent post is interesting, however, I respectfully disagree with your position/definition of an "all cash" deal. As a real estate attorney who practiced big law for 5 years (before joining Bertsch Properties with my dad), I have closed innumerable deals from single-family and condo deals to multi-family, office and retail, and my experience is that very few "all cash" offers include outside financing or a mortgage.

I thought for a second I was out of touch, so I searched Investopedia for the definition of an all cash deal. I won't endorse Investopedia as the final say on all financial definitions, but this site agrees with me and the broker you questioned in your blog. Their definition says, "The transfer of a real estate property without financing or mortgages; the buyer would produce the appropriate funds at the time of closing " http://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/all-cash-deal.asp

Your article would be accurate by defining an "all cash" deal as an evolving term with more than one definition (no financing and/or no financing contingency), but it's wrong and misleading to state that an "all cash" deal only means there is no financing contingency. Your experience may be that an "all cash" deal means financing with no mortgage contingency, but an "all cash" deal can certainly be all cash from the buyer with no loan. The latter is not a misconception, but a common practice, as I can confirm firsthand.


Thanks again, David. I cannot tell you how much I appreciate your point of view and your willingness to share it with me.