Originally Posted by Trashoutqueen
I'm curious as to what others think on what happened with Fas and Fannie Mae. Fas claims they are the one that didn't want to renew the contract because fm wanted more from the vendors without giving more money. And Fas 'took a stand'. Then I've also heard that fm was dissatisfied with Fas. What's your take?
Its probably somewhere in the middle. I have had conversations with some people at FAS fairly high up, and they essentially tried to go back to the bargaining table, or they would need to fullfill the rest of their contract and then move past it. I don't know if that is a stand, but it wasn't feasable for them or their vendors financially.
FM appears to have said they didn't like some things with FAS etc.. I think its a matter of "you don't break up with me, I break up with you". FM is just a pit. There are very large problems there that go far beyond their asset management. The pride of those involved clouds what really happened on all fronts. I think FM is clearly asking too much across the board for what tey are willing to pay. Its one of the biggest complaints on this board. The cycles will just go around and around.
I learned here that everyone has good and bad things to say based on personal experience about all of these nationwides. I personally would rather gouge my eyes out with hot pokers than do buisness with Safeguard for example. But some have had better experiences than myself.
This is the key.
In my limited expereince, FM will try to leverage whatever they can to create a constant fear of their contract being "lost" by whoever has it. Agents are told to "find something" to fail on properties BSO's. Many have told us this directly. They are playing with loaded dice, and since the goal post keeps moving, the nationwides and in turn their vendors, cannot ever make them happy 100%, which I believe is by design so that they never lose negotiating high ground.