@Chadstroma - need your insight please. I read a rumor on Stocktwits (great source - I know) that RKT is closing about 200 mortgage loans per day while UWMC is closing about 1500-2000 per day. Any insight as to if you think those numbers are real? I’ve been reading your posts for years about how you feel UWMC is far superior. I’m just curious - these rumored numbers are striking - if true, how long is Rocket for the game. May go in HUGE on UWMC.
I remember two friends arguing over AAPL or MSFT in the early 90s. MSFT was winning, but the tables turned, and both won at this point, if they just held on. But MSFT in the 90's went bonkers. Then stagnate for 10 years. Literally, at one point, it was the same price one decade later. But now in this last 13 years or so, it's a whole other story, including a little dividend to go along with it.
The argument was how marketing almost always wins. And at the time (early 90's), Microsoft and Gates seemed to be the "Rocket" (Mortgage), if you will. While the Apple argument guy was like no, Apple will win out because of innovation and such (UWM).
Now it seems, the roles are reversed, ironically enough, in that Apple is all about the marketing -- and there is no question they are not just good at it, but great -- and less about innovation (although I wouldn't know for sure). Meanwhile, Microsoft, the big bad monster monopoly at one time, has quietly chugged along with a lower profile. And with that, the results speak for themselves. MSFT is no longer some laughing stock (sorry, had to). Anyway, that dinosaur (for tech) has gone from a T-Rex to a Brontosaurus. And the grazing is good.
Now, not knowing a thing about the mortgage biz, but having followed Chad's drum beat for UWM on here, along with his disdain for Rocket, likens me back to the two tech giants above, in some way. And don't get me wrong, I'm in no way against Chad, and VERY much appreciate the info and his side of things, but it will be very interesting to see how this plays out, is all.
Wall Street isn't dumb. That price, corresponding to the overwhelming yield are there for a reason. There's no way it's that easy. Rocket, and others I assume, must have something (marketing for one, obviously) that makes many astute analysts and firms, not convinced on UWM. Or maybe it's just that they are more convinced on the strategy of Rocket and others. I really have no idea and would follow the advice of Chad, if I had to pick. That being said, it does seem to derive from a, and I don't want to say biased, but certain side of the industry. Unless I'm mistaken, that's not the entire pie, if you will. Anyway, that price and yield are too good to be true, imo, and something has to give. What exactly, I wish I knew. I may start nibbling, actually.
As for the marketing side of things (getting back to Rocket's strengths), I am a strong believer in it. People are idiots, for the most part. If the marketing is that good -- so much so that the "innovation or technology" of a competitor is compromised -- then I will side with the marketing (and the not-so-smart humans that follow it) winning out. It doesn't always matter who has, or what the best product is...all that matters is who and how many will buy it.
So as much as Rocket sucks, from what I've learned here (when you get down to the nuts and the bolts of it), they might be doing something right (marketing), to be able to suck all these apes into the campfire in their cave. And that just might be enough to stave off competitors, and more. We'll see.
FTR, I wouldn't put a penny on them, after reading this ongoing discussion. And I would love more than anything to go all-in on UWM. But Wall Street isn't this clueless. People like to think they are, and sure, occasionally you can find some story of how "easy" it was. But it isn't.
That yield and price are not going unnoticed in the least. That's actually the part that gives me pause. There's way more here and I would love to know what it is.