Housing prices are outrageous.

[WesternRacing]

1 hour ago, Nickb333 said:

I understand what you’re saying, but…

 

If your house burned and you don’t rebuild, you’ll potentially leave a lot of money on the table. Most insurance policies are not obligated to pay the full replacement cost of your loss unless you actually replace what was lost. Exceptions occur, but the key word here is obligated. 

 

No, I was simply saying that if I suddenly didn’t own that property, I’d never choose to own a house that I lived in again, unless I found the perfect place at a can’t pass up price.  I think a lot of people buy into the idea that everyone should strive for home ownership because it gets shoved down our throats so many ways.  I don’t think it’s the best option for everyone.  But to each his own, everyone has different perspectives.

Edited April 18 by WesternRacing

[Jraallen]

2 hours ago, MK7Golf21 said:

I think the problem people have with renting is sharing walls with other units, unless you rent a house from someone.

Also the insecurity and possibility of rules from a landlord. My wife and I have 3 cats and a dog, from what I’ve seen most rentals IF they allow pets have a limit, and even if they did allow it, just knowing that one day they might decide to stop renting and now I have to uproot my life and find a new home would scare the crap out of me. I’d imagine if I had kids and was worried about school systems it’d be even worse.

[596]

I agree with all that has been said. But there's one other side of the coin to be remembered.  If you own a home and it's paid off at the time of retirement you'll be much better off then renting forever.  We own outright, no mortgage.  Very cheap taxes and insurance that is right at national average even though we are in Florida. We couldn't afford rent in this area being retired. It's crazy expensive.  Not rich by any definition but very comfortable in our waterfront home.  Glad we bought in 2012 at the bottom of the market and paid cash as we retired when we moved here from Arizona.

[Nickb333]

1 hour ago, WesternRacing said:

 

No, I was simply saying that if I suddenly didn’t own that property, I’d never choose to own a house that I lived in again, unless I found the perfect place at a can’t pass up price.  I think a lot of people buy into the idea that everyone should strive for home ownership because it gets shoved down our throats so many ways.  I don’t think it’s the best option for everyone.  But to each his own, everyone has different perspectives.

So, you would rebuild, sell and then rent something? 

Either way, good on you for having a vision/plan for the future. 

 

[WesternRacing]

19 minutes ago, Nickb333 said:

So, you would rebuild, sell and then rent something? 

Either way, good on you for having a vision/plan for the future. 

 

Yes, I would rebuild and sell in a fire situation, but I was actually using the ‘burn down’ scenario simply to mean, if I didn’t already own a home. In that case, I wouldn’t be looking to buy one.  I think homeownership is way overrated and only makes sense for certain people, not for everyone.  And I think a lot of people come to that conclusion…after owning a home for a while.  But it’s very situation, and life stage, dependent.

[WesternRacing]

33 minutes ago, 596 said:

I agree with all that has been said. But there's one other side of the coin to be remembered.  If you own a home and it's paid off at the time of retirement you'll be much better off then renting forever.  We own outright, no mortgage.  Very cheap taxes and insurance that is right at national average even though we are in Florida. We couldn't afford rent in this area being retired. It's crazy expensive.  Not rich by any definition but very comfortable in our waterfront home.  Glad we bought in 2012 at the bottom of the market and paid cash as we retired when we moved here from Arizona.

 

But that math wouldn’t work for everyone and a lot depends on how much your house is appreciating net of the cost of ownership.  I own my house outright, but if it’s not appreciating each year, I’m losing income by not selling, investing that money in Treasuries, and renting.

[Nickb333]

14 minutes ago, WesternRacing said:

Yes, I would rebuild and sell in a fire situation, but I was actually using the ‘burn down’ scenario simply to mean, if I didn’t already own a home. In that case, I wouldn’t be looking to buy one.  I think homeownership is way overrated and only makes sense for certain people, not for everyone.  And I think a lot of people come to that conclusion…after owning a home for a while.  But it’s very situation, and life stage, dependent.

Right on.
 

Of course if you were already just renting, a fire wouldn’t motivate you to buy a house. 
 

Why buy a house if you don’t want one? Your last line sums it up. 

[Nickb333]

17 minutes ago, WesternRacing said:

 

But that math wouldn’t work for everyone and a lot depends on how much your house is appreciating net of the cost of ownership.  I own my house outright, but if it’s not appreciating each year, I’m losing income by not selling, investing that money in Treasuries, and renting.

So why not sell? 

[Petethreeput]

11 hours ago, mshills said:

It really sucks for anyone who needs / wants to buy right now. In many areas the housing / wages ratio — for local employment — does not make sense. And, money is relatively more costly than it was ~6y ago. 
 

I don’t expect money to get cheaper. The low points on 30y mortgages circa 2019 I think were more the anomaly. I do expect to see a major realignment of pay for remote work, and I am surprised firms have not been more aggressive about doing so. House prices will correct sometime but no clue when. 
 

One more point. Renting is not throwing money away. I despise that tired old cliche….like all blanket statements it is not true. Many people’s situation is perfect for renting, and if a 30 year old thinks equity from his home is going to fund retirement, think again. As long as someone continues to save using other vehicles, there is nothing wrong with renting. 

I don’t think anyone makes money on a home.  Residential real estate appreciates at 3%, plus expenses, that’s a big fat zero. A person makes money on the equity. But ownership is a path to wealth, maybe not riches, but it is a leg up.

[Treats]

On 4/8/2025 at 11:47 AM, onthebogeytrain said:

NE South Dakota

SD ranks 30th in pricing of the 50 states. I would have guessed it to be lower.

I think SD's home prices are still relatively cheap vs. the top 5 states.

Likely really cheap vs. the top 5 cities.

[DJDJ]

On 4/16/2025 at 1:39 PM, bladehunter said:

 

I’d start by outlawing private equity buys. And I’d make it broad.  For business too.  And make it a felony to try to back door that.  Stop  the sale of successful mom and pop shops. All it does is falsely inflate valuations. Because the part out is worth more than the whole. It’s bad for society.  They lie and say they build by facilitating business they don’t. They mostly kill.  The Joann fabrics story ( google it ) is a prime example. They bought a thriving business trading at $45 and no debt. Inside 10 years of equity buy out , they file bankruptcy and stock is at $12.  All they did was milk it to death. By design.  T

Not to turn this into a referendum on Private Equity, but your solution in bold is to outlaw capitalism?  If you eliminate a huge swath of buyers for homes and businesses from the total population, you'd expect valuation to crater, banks to stop lending, millions of bankruptcies, etc.  A better solution is to make it easier for new home starts. 

 

As for the business part, if you work hard your whole life to create a valuable business, you now aren't allowed to sell to again, a huge part of the available capital in the world?  You think Exxon is going to treat a small oil and gas company more fairly than a PE buyer when they know there isn't another person out there to buy the company?  Not to mention how is this even enforceable?  I mean technically anything that isn't a c-corp could be considered "private" equity.  Do you just base it on the number of LPs?  that just makes it to where a few super rich guys benefit and every retailer investor gets screwed.

 

In my experience you couldn't be more wrong on the intent of PE.  they make money by investing capital, and returning more than they invested to investors.  The way they do that is by increasing the value of the entity.  Do some go sideways? Sure, but so do unpurchased businesses.  I've been part of 3 PE portfolio companies.  The one's I've been in have collectively created over 2000 jobs in 10 years and created the start of generational wealth for a lot of employees that worked hard and deserved a payday.  Ymmv.

 

 

Edited April 20 by DJDJ

[bladehunter]

6 hours ago, DJDJ said:

Not to turn this into a referendum on Private Equity, but your solution in bold is to outlaw capitalism?  If you eliminate a huge swath of buyers for homes and businesses from the total population, you'd expect valuation to crater, banks to stop lending, millions of bankruptcies, etc.  A better solution is to make it easier for new home starts. 

 

As for the business part, if you work hard your whole life to create a valuable business, you now aren't allowed to sell to again, a huge part of the available capital in the world?  You think Exxon is going to treat a small oil and gas company more fairly than a PE buyer when they know there isn't another person out there to buy the company?  Not to mention how is this even enforceable?  I mean technically anything that isn't a c-corp could be considered "private" equity.  Do you just base it on the number of LPs?  that just makes it to where a few super rich guys benefit and every retailer investor gets screwed.

 

In my experience you couldn't be more wrong on the intent of PE.  they make money by investing capital, and returning more than they invested to investors.  The way they do that is by increasing the value of the entity.  Do some go sideways? Sure, but so do unpurchased businesses.  I've been part of 3 PE portfolio companies.  The one's I've been in have collectively created over 2000 jobs in 10 years and created the start of generational wealth for a lot of employees that worked hard and deserved a payday.  Ymmv.

 

 

Of course it’s more nuanced than I said.  Way more. But that might take a year or hammer out. The gist is solid.  PE buying up healthcare is costing quality options to disappear from the landscape. They buy successful practices. Gut the longtime employees , and you see quality flounder. They streamline to a “ herd them in and herd them out “ model. Where you see a different doc each time , and you get no real care. But they make 5 % more than mom and pop did , and in 5-10 years they sellout to the state owned healthcare system , and then it goes down further to a “ health  dept “ level facility.  I’ve seen it so many times.  Private mom and pop practices are better in every way . Period. Full stop.  For patients. Employees and doctors . This is part of the healthcare problem equation.  A huge part. 
 

there’s a huge difference between capitalism and crony capitalism.  PE groups are the latter .  I can detail why if you’d like with personal experience examples. 
 

as far as the housing issue.  Yes. If the ones creating the fake demand go down. Let them.  There’s no reason why someone with a home should go bankrupt because the valuation drops. Unless they’re 3 mortgages in .  Even then there’s no reason why they can’t just keep paying. Unless they couldn’t  pay before. It will stop the house hopping.  And allow those who can’t now - to buy.  
 

what your missing about PE is HOW they increase returns.  It’s at the expense of the soul of a practice. And the employees who built it. The “ created  jobs “ are always due to them laying  or running off the higher paid employees and replacing them with 2-3 per person that they pay Pennys and less to no benefits.  They’ll install HR depts to put in place a culture of turnover , and that makes the percent of return rise. But it kills the actual place. 
they’re there to kill and eat.  Nothing more.they build and produce nothing of value to anyone but shareholders. 

 

 

just because I don’t have all the logistics worked out , doesn’t mean that I don’t know what crap smells like when I step in it. Homes being atms , markets that force renting and doctors being owned by PE firms are not good things. At all.  
 

short version of my argument is -that a reversion back might have a painful moment .. but overall shrinking the scale of home values would be better for owners. Taxes go down.  Cash buyers go up , and in the end values settle , just on a smaller scale. The inflated scale is the issue. It’s fake. And it’s all to make the top end ( govt and banks/investors) more money. I’m all for entrepreneurial capitalism.  Which is the only true form there is. That phrase is actually is insulting , because it assumes there are other types.  Singular rich entity’s that result from capitalism is preferable to many collective entity’s that collab to entrap and entice the individual. They masquerade as individuals.  But hide from scrutiny that individuals must endure or face.  

Edited April 20 by bladehunter

[Wooley12]

[MK7Golf21]

It's still going from the 2020 covid housing surge. It was caused by a mix of record low mortgage rates that people expect to not see in their lifetime, low inventory levels, a work from home model (covid), lockdowns causing people to want more room from existing houses or out of apartments where there could be covid spreads, peoples savings filling up from not going out/vacations and the stimulus checks, etc. The feds brought the rate way too low and kept it there while the housing market was on a rocket ship. They probably should have brought it up and back to normal much, much sooner. 

 

Now you have a ton of people that refinanced to those low rates or people who bought too much house but have a record low rate. Neither of them want to give up their low rates to sell their homes so they are kind of stuck. Adds to the current housing shortage.

Edited April 21 by MK7Golf21

[bladehunter]

3 hours ago, MK7Golf21 said:

It's still going from the 2020 covid housing surge. It was caused by a mix of record low mortgage rates that people expect to not see in their lifetime, low inventory levels, a work from home model (covid), lockdowns causing people to want more room from existing houses or out of apartments where there could be covid spreads, peoples savings filling up from not going out/vacations and the stimulus checks, etc. The feds brought the rate way too low and kept it there while the housing market was on a rocket ship. They probably should have brought it up and back to normal much, much sooner. 

 

Now you have a ton of people that refinanced to those low rates or people who bought too much house but have a record low rate. Neither of them want to give up their low rates to sell their homes so they are kind of stuck. Adds to the current housing shortage.

I sure do wish the bolder and underlined parts of your post were true for us.  Business owners were sexually assaulted daily for 2 years at least.  But it does highlight the play golf ….er I mean work from home model 🤣.  And why I see so many who seem to be opposite of me.    I was in line today at a supermarket. And a dude behind me is on the phone rounding up a 4 some for his 530 ( yes 530 ) tee time.  Today.  And his 330 Tomorow. The jealous side of me wanted to throat punch him.  Intrusive thoughts and all.  But.  I just listened.  While I knew I had 12 hour days for the next 14 till I’d see an hour off again. Rolling the dice on knowing that buying more land , and staying the course will produce freedom again before I die. I’m 45.  I am dead serious.  Will we get to see pre 2019 freedom again ?  I hope. So I get up and push .  It’s very interesting to me how different folks are effected differently.  I’ve worked and produced since I was 15. I question that about others. But again. The green eyed monster is in us all. 

[MK7Golf21]

24 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

I sure do wish the bolder and underlined parts of your post were true for us.  Business owners were sexually assaulted daily for 2 years at least.  But it does highlight the play golf ….er I mean work from home model 🤣.  And why I see so many who seem to be opposite of me.    I was in line today at a supermarket. And a dude behind me is on the phone rounding up a 4 some for his 530 ( yes 530 ) tee time.  Today.  And his 330 Tomorow. The jealous side of me wanted to throat punch him.  Intrusive thoughts and all.  But.  I just listened.  While I knew I had 12 hour days for the next 14 till I’d see an hour off again. Rolling the dice on knowing that buying more land , and staying the course will produce freedom again before I die. I’m 45.  I am dead serious.  Will we get to see pre 2019 freedom again ?  I hope. So I get up and push .  It’s very interesting to me how different folks are effected differently.  I’ve worked and produced since I was 15. I question that about others. But again. The green eyed monster is in us all. 

 

yea, certain sectors like restaurants etc. People stayed in and had a frozen pizza while watching a movie instead of going to the expensive restaurant and movie theatre. Hence their savings went through the roof. Probably was a better solution out there for the economy vs. dropping rates like they did.

 

We have been a hybrid wfh model for like 2 years now (3 days in office). They just got rid of the hybrid model for 5 days in office though so it seems more business are going back to normal. So many moved far away and are unable to go in now. 

Edited April 21 by MK7Golf21

[aenemated]

I've not had to go to an office since March of 2020. Hell, I've never even seen my current spot's office and I'll be hitting 4 years next month. 

 

That said, I was a freelancer by choice from 2008-2012 so working from home wasn't a foreign concept. I treat working from home the same as when I did go into an office - except I might not put on pants till noon or so. Not to say I haven't ducked out early sometimes - but I did back in the office days too. Hell, I probably do it less nowadays. 

[MK7Golf21]

14 minutes ago, aenemated said:

I've not had to go to an office since March of 2020. Hell, I've never even seen my current spot's office and I'll be hitting 4 years next month. 

 

That said, I was a freelancer by choice from 2008-2012 so working from home wasn't a foreign concept. I treat working from home the same as when I did go into an office - except I might not put on pants till noon or so. Not to say I haven't ducked out early sometimes - but I did back in the office days too. Hell, I probably do it less nowadays. 

 

hybrid model probably the best to me. You get out of the house away from family/kids and around co-workers so it's better socially. Then you also get the perks of a few days working from home, don't have to get ready or drive into the office early. Seemed a pretty good balance to me.

[Petethreeput]

19 minutes ago, aenemated said:

I've not had to go to an office

 

2 minutes ago, MK7Golf21 said:

hybrid model probably the best to me

I work for myself, and know myself (at least I like to think so).  Even during the lockdown one of us would go into the office so weren't cross contaminating as the ideas of the day stated.  But I knew I couldn't do a danged thing at the house.  Settle in, oh wait, I need water then the dog needs to go out then I'd better make a sandwich then I better mow the lawn then I better...  I have to be in the office or I am going to do nothing.

[bladehunter]

3 hours ago, MK7Golf21 said:

 

yea, certain sectors like restaurants etc. People stayed in and had a frozen pizza while watching a movie instead of going to the expensive restaurant and movie theatre. Hence their savings went through the roof. Probably was a better solution out there for the economy vs. dropping rates like they did.

 

We have been a hybrid wfh model for like 2 years now (3 days in office). They just got rid of the hybrid model for 5 days in office though so it seems more business are going back to normal. So many moved far away and are unable to go in now. 

Yep. I know a couple who moved so they wouldn’t get called in. Word came down last week “ move back. Commute or we will find someone who will “. The guy in the situation was building their own house while “ working “.    I realize some can do it. But it really calls into question what they’re actually producing if they can do both?  
 

wife’s office has a new manager for a dept ( insurance / claims …that is hybrid schedule .  Her dept is constantly under informed. And top of the pile on rework , mistakes.  Why? Because they’re under informed , out of the loop.  .  Yet - get this. That hybrid manager clocks  in and logs more hours than any one ( salary but still punch  a clock). That hybrid status is about to get squashed. 


now I realize that exceptions are real. I have no doubt that the old salt @aenemated is one of them.  But.  I’d argue that those exceptions are the guys who could run their own place , but are smart enough not to.  And we all know that most of the workforce doesn’t fit  that mold.  Yet they  handed  out work from  home spots like parking passes. Crazy talk in my opinion.  

Edited April 21 by bladehunter

[bladehunter]

2 hours ago, Petethreeput said:

 

I work for myself, and know myself (at least I like to think so).  Even during the lockdown one of us would go into the office so weren't cross contaminating as the ideas of the day stated.  But I knew I couldn't do a danged thing at the house.  Settle in, oh wait, I need water then the dog needs to go out then I'd better make a sandwich then I better mow the lawn then I better...  I have to be in the office or I am going to do nothing.

This.  10k this. There’s absolutely no way . My biggest hurdle ever morning is the 300 yard walk from my house to my shop.  If I make it there , I’m usually good till noon whne I walk the dog. Then I have to do it again.  I have t dodge neighbors. Old relatives that drive up , other animals.  And passersby. It’s a literal conundrum of crap if I stay in my house.  I’d need a gate on the driveway and a sniper to work in the house.  

[aenemated]

1 hour ago, bladehunter said:

I’d argue that those exceptions are the guys who could run their own place , but are smart enough not to.

 

It's precisely why I stopped freelancing. I had tons of work coming in (and I was never one to say "No" to more money) but it got to where I was spending more time trying to deal with accounts payable to get paid than actually doing, ya know, the work I enjoy doing. So when one of my most consistent clients hit me up all "How much for you to just work for me?" Gave him a number and he was like "Done." Best decision ever. 

[bladehunter]

2 hours ago, aenemated said:

 

It's precisely why I stopped freelancing. I had tons of work coming in (and I was never one to say "No" to more money) but it got to where I was spending more time trying to deal with accounts payable to get paid than actually doing, ya know, the work I enjoy doing. So when one of my most consistent clients hit me up all "How much for you to just work for me?" Gave him a number and he was like "Done." Best decision ever. 

Yep. As soon as someone asks me that question , I’d be out too. I don’t live close enough to Jay Leno or Tim allen though.  So not likely.  I’ve had that in a part time scale. A taste if you will.  And it’s nice.  Just hard to find.  

[bladehunter]

On 4/18/2025 at 9:03 PM, Jraallen said:

Also the insecurity and possibility of rules from a landlord. My wife and I have 3 cats and a dog, from what I’ve seen most rentals IF they allow pets have a limit, and even if they did allow it, just knowing that one day they might decide to stop renting and now I have to uproot my life and find a new home would scare the crap out of me. I’d imagine if I had kids and was worried about school systems it’d be even worse.

Amen amen amen.  All of the above.   I have a door frame facer board where I measured my son from knee high to 6ft 4.  He’s 16. I’ll make him do that till he leaves my house.🤣 Once a year.
 

I put down roots. That’s just me. The idea of having to move makes me  want to puke.  

[golferdude54]

Someone compared Jackson Hole and Vail to northeast South Dakota in this thread. Really? Those are multimillionaires' retreat towns and South Dakota is well... South Dakota.

 

It's like in Wayne's World, "Imagine being able to be magically whisked away to... Delaware... Hi.. I'm in Delaware."

[Nickb333]

7 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Yep. I know a couple who moved so they wouldn’t get called in. Word came down last week “ move back. Commute or we will find someone who will “. The guy in the situation was building their own house while “ working “.    I realize some can do it. But it really calls into question what they’re actually producing if they can do both?  
 

wife’s office has a new manager for a dept ( insurance / claims …that is hybrid schedule .  Her dept is constantly under informed. And top of the pile on rework , mistakes.  Why? Because they’re under informed , out of the loop.  .  Yet - get this. That hybrid manager clocks  in and logs more hours than any one ( salary but still punch  a clock). That hybrid status is about to get squashed. 


now I realize that exceptions are real. I have no doubt that the old salt @aenemated is one of them.  But.  I’d argue that those exceptions are the guys who could run their own place , but are smart enough not to.  And we all know that most of the workforce doesn’t fit  that mold.  Yet they  handed  out work from  home spots like parking passes. Crazy talk in my opinion.  

Curious, what is under informed? I know what the words mean, but how does that apply to people working with contracts and precedent? Are they new? Untrained? Etc? 

[Nickb333]

1 hour ago, golferdude54 said:

Someone compared Jackson Hole and Vail to northeast South Dakota in this thread. Really? Those are multimillionaires' retreat towns and South Dakota is well... South Dakota.

 

It's like in Wayne's World, "Imagine being able to be magically whisked away to... Delaware... Hi.. I'm in Delaware."

Agreed. No comparison. South Dakota and the residents are really nice. 😊 

[bladehunter]

7 hours ago, Nickb333 said:

Curious, what is under informed? I know what the words mean, but how does that apply to people working with contracts and precedent? Are they new? Untrained? Etc? 

Well. With insurance claims and tracking. It’s a daily fluid deal.  Kind of like a firefighter. The procedures change.  The locations change depending on the problem type  ( in this instance it’s different cases daily ) and the workload fluctuates depending on what time of the month and year.  Codes change. Denial reasons dilated daily.  Insurance companies are the largest scam artists on earth.  This depts sole mission is to thwart these denials.  And get the practice paid.  Always a moving target. 
 

this manager is just totally out of the loop on a day to day basis.  They call it “ peeing on fires”.  She’s not present to help put out the fires.  So her employees are constantly going to my wife or other managers to find real time help.  They can message their manager. But those responses often come minutes later. Or worse. That’s not quick enough sometimes. Not to mention that her entire staff must work in house , and she has no oversight on their HR related activities. It’s just a lord of the flies free for all in this one dept.  and it happens to be the dept that is responsible for the practice getting paid.  She’s called “ the manager in name only “. 

Edited April 22 by bladehunter

[mshills]

21 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Well. With insurance claims and tracking. It’s a daily fluid deal.  Kind of like a firefighter. The procedures change.  The locations change depending on the problem type  ( in this instance it’s different cases daily ) and the workload fluctuates depending on what time of the month and year.  Codes change. Denial reasons dilated daily.  Insurance companies are the largest scam artists on earth.  This depts sole mission is to thwart these denials.  And get the practice paid.  Always a moving target. 
 

this manager is just totally out of the loop on a day to day basis.  They call it “ peeing on fires”.  She’s not present to help put out the fires.  So her employees are constantly going to my wife or other managers to find real time help.  They can message their manager. But those responses often come minutes later. Or worse. That’s not quick enough sometimes. Not to mention that her entire staff must work in house , and she has no oversight on their HR related activities. It’s just a lord of the flies free for all in this one dept.  and it happens to be the dept that is responsible for the practice getting paid.  She’s called “ the manager in name only “. 

Whole lot of problems there, yikes. 

 

First observation is if the process is so reactionary that it relies on someone pinging a manager for help and the response coming minutes later is too late, that is a serious issue.

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, mshills said:

Whole lot of problems there, yikes. 

 

First observation is if the process is so reactionary that it relies on someone pinging a manager for help and the response coming minutes later is too late, that is a serious issue.

Yep.in years  past it was much less reactionary. With an old manager that retired.  The current one was under her . And widely known to be a bad replacement. Yet they promoted via seniority vs skill.  If you start in top of it.  It’s much less reactionary indeed.   But it always will be to a degree. Because the insurance companies change policy often. Always trying to dodge .

 

A good for instance is surgery pre certification.  If you don’t pre cert all , they won’t pay.  . Well they often find out that the diagnosis or reason for procedure is not acceptable, the morning of the surgery.  So it’s a race against time to get it corrected or the procedure is off for that day. Because if you do it without pre certification, you absolutely will not get paid. People have no idea how crooked the insurance business is with regards to healthcare. We’re talking a 12-20k dollar procedure , that’s warranted , covered , and being done by top docs , but might not get paid because a piece of paper is filed an hour late.  Or a diagnosis code is for “ medically necessary “ vs “ elective “ etc. 

Edited April 22 by bladehunter