Pricing the same wholesale deal both ways: assignment against a funded double close
A useful case study for anyone weighing assignment against a funded double close is a contract at 205,000 on a tired but clean four bedroom in an inner-ring suburb, with an end buyer at 227,000. Run it as an assignment. The fee, 22,000, has to be disclosed on the settlement statement in states that require it, the buyer sees the number, and a buyer who has a habit of renegotiating when a fee embarrasses them often comes back at 14 or 15, taking a 7,000 haircut with maybe a 30 percent chance of holding the full number. Run it as a double close with transactional funding. A funder at 0.93 percent on 205,000 runs 1,900. Extra title work and a second closing run 1,350. Transfer tax on the second leg runs 1,025 in a typical county, wires run 90. Total mechanical cost lands around 4,365 against a 22,000 spread, leaving 17,635, and the buyer never sees the purchase price at closing, though in states where recorded prices are public, that number is visible after the fact once the deed is recorded. The part that can break a double close under time pressure is timing between wires: a funder wanting the end buyer's cash in escrow a day or two ahead of a wire that lands only a day out puts the closing agent in the position of deciding whether to proceed on a wire that has actually cleared. Running both versions on paper before choosing is the discipline worth keeping, and whether an assignment is even permitted the way it is described here depends on state rules that shift often enough to be worth confirming with an attorney rather than assuming.
