Home Ownership Process Optimization Transcript

Recording 2: Homeownership Process Optimization
Source: Notion export, 3/16/26
Participants: Speaker 1 (David), Speaker 2, Speaker 3, Sydney Bocik, Unknown Speakers

Speaker 1 0:04: Have to understand the why, then also sell a post. Close concierge, advocate on, did you get utilities? Did you do the transfer? Who to contact? I mean, your next 60 days is probably it's like going into a new country. Do you have a Sherpa? And do you have a Sherpa? It's the postcode Sherpa.

Speaker 1 0:38: And you have to land softly by having the checklist is beyond mortgage into the by the ways, and then the by the ways, need to provide access to the information if and when they want it, and then when they close, understand that they won't review anything, but still be available for them to fix the problem. And then to do a 60 day, 90 day in the 120 checkup, and then we need to have best practices on, okay, what did everything get transferred? Everything get turned on? Didn't they get a mail for, like, the common short term, and then home inspections? And say, by the way, here's the contest, all your contest, your insurance agents, the E and O insurance, right? Here's, here's the best practices of, are you having any of these problems? Is there anything else that we that would be that, that would be that? Okay, so to me, in our purchase model. That is the soft landing. That is the Sherpa. That is the if we can make that promise clear up front, from search to settlement to serine. Now we're into servicing. We skip securitization, because that's underneath the water line. So there. That's what we now. Now we just have search to settlement, to servicing, to smiles. I don't know what smiles.

Sydney Bocik 2:15: I'm not saying that's a version one. I'm just saying like, like, it's the it's the but

Speaker 1 2:28: it is interesting redefining the problem, if you're going to be unbiased, and we are actually having the consumer, and we are looking at the word affordability,

Sydney Bocik 2:38: if we were actually going to be unbiased and the incentives were going to be different, then we would care about the borrower after they closed, after we got the check that

Speaker 1 2:52: this will lead us into the permission to always be approved. This allows us to have the permission of a relationship after the transaction. This will allow us to have people opt in into the conversation. So this is our bridge into the next

Speaker 1 3:20: website now that our website now is too small, we have to figure that out. But

Sydney Bocik 3:37: I'm sorry, gloating. Why wouldn't I be gloating? No, it's just funny, like Remora and Parlin or something.

Speaker 1 3:55: I'm a transaction and then a Sherpa. Okay, so you still have a transaction, but we're doing it through yours is a checklist community Sherpa, and then your transaction is a platform that

Sydney Bocik 4:08: community is not the community is not the same. The community would to me, for perland is the network of lenders and real estate agents, no,

Speaker 1 4:22: yes, no. So the community, application conversations, value is different, but so the checklist, or guides and the Sherpa, that's pretty clear, the transaction and the community, I think, which is, I think the transaction is just the doing the thing. So that's in, you know, applicable the community, the

Sydney Bocik 4:46: transaction is the visa application, or it's the mortgage application, right?

Speaker 1 4:51: So the visa, but then you have a follow up on the check in, and the yes, it's a thing,

Sydney Bocik 5:05: and then a soft landing after this was the Sherpa. It's when they don't know that they have to get a the sink, the fucking electrical being all fucked is the equivalent of when you're stuck in another country and you had to get a French number and you factor authentication doesn't work anymore for your American phone number, and you're fucked and you can't get into your bank, that's when that happens. Now, who I call? Because nobody told me that that was something to fucking consider.

Speaker 1 5:46: That'd be interesting. You have a upsell, you have the AI, the concierge, part of a certain premium service, and then you can have a human as a human service, because

Speaker 2 5:59: now it's not even just always approved financially. It's always approved for a visa in every other country. You see they are the same.

Speaker 1 6:09: I see it. I see it the community parties. I was thinking more about enrichment, but that could be our interesting. How them like that one? Yeah, no, I, I get it's funny. Well, I think that's why people do a lot of businesses, because they're just structurally can be done the same with just different products or terms. So, okay,

Speaker 1 7:06: so I do, I do want to. I gotcha. It's, it's something that we need to skate towards. And if we do the refinance, the refinance gives us some gratitude, some grace, to skate to the purchase and picking up the question, the conversations and the checklists and, you know, all the horror stories, so it gives us some R D time. So this is a good thing. So I'm I gotcha, I You were very clear that you don't want to write requirements and manage this project. You're really quite clear about that. And so what we're doing right now seems to be more into getting to product and product design.

Sydney Bocik 7:59: I like having like product ideas. I think I, I, I think I, my, my brain has worked in terms of product and for a long time, like in terms of functions and features. My not wanting to write requirements conversation is because I don't know enough about this process to define workflows that won't result in gaps and bugs and issues. I just, I don't think it's good for anybody, for me to be the one writing requirements, because there's caveats, like you legally can't say that, that I won't know about. I just, I don't, I don't think it's good for anybody like, but from like, from like, a strategic perspective, like, I think this is missing from the product. Like, I think that stuff is fun. From like a, from like a borrowers, I think would care about X, Y and Z. I think that's cool, like my I think my brain works in a lot of that way. I just I don't. My highest and best use is not being like aware of all of the pitfalls legally, if we say something in a chat that we shouldn't have. Does that make sense?

Speaker 1 9:29: I hear you, so I'm gonna ask your definition of your project that you that have that does not have as much product in it, and I know that we're, we're going to wear a lot of hats, so I want to, it is my opinion you would like to be in product, not but not a requirements of the product or the project. Is that, again, I want to be respectful, because you were very adamant about this, this conversation, and I we're going in this direction, and I don't want, well,

Sydney Bocik 10:08: right now, we don't have anybody else, and I think to start are really important, and I'm okay, but like, do I want the product to be built only with these flows in Mind? It's the same conversation we had about, like the AITC, where I said, like, there's a bunch of shit here, but like somebody else needs to take a look at this. I i the anxiety of, like, I'm missing a whole step that can fundamentally change the user experience. Like, I don't like that, but like saying, like, directionally, we're missing this whole thing that, like borrowers, I think would really care about. Like, that's cool. I think, I think we're all gonna wear a lot of hats in the beginning. I'm fine with a lot of hats. Like, just like, direct, this is what needs to be built like I don't think I'm the right person for that. You see what I'm saying.

Speaker 1 11:08: I hear you. So let me ask you on using the AITC as an example, as the gather of the emails, the questions, the checklist, the steps you did a nice job on that. Is that something you do not want to do, or you think you could do that, and then hand it off to someone to fill in the gaps and validate, help me to understand,

Sydney Bocik 11:33: I just worry even around that where I don't know the persona, or I don't know necessarily the scenario, like, what if I'm missing things that fundamentally change the questions that are asked that result in the information that I'm given? Like, if that still requires me to like, know enough about the persona to ask the right questions,

Speaker 1 11:59: I understand the concern I am, what I'm trying to figure out is not, not put you in position where you are very upset, and I need to, I need to address that sooner than you get upset. That's what I'm trying to weigh that

Sydney Bocik 12:12: I need to do right now. You want to be writing long term requirements now I

Speaker 1 12:20: understand, the requirement details. You're very clear, and we will, we will make sure that that is addressed. However, right now we're going to the taxonomy of the conversation. We're going to the taxonomy of the why we're defining problems. We're divine. We're going to projects and product versus the company and organizational data structure as the AI, Chief Strategy, of staff, which is your definition of your your role. So I'm asking for this wrong nature, because we're going to the next week or two, we're going to go deeper products, and I'm going to live in that and I need to know where I need to put you,

Sydney Bocik 13:01: like honestly at this point, like, how the company is structured matters significantly less than the MVP. Like, at this point, the only thing that really matters is the MVP. Like, I can live, eat, breathe, sleep, the MVP like, that's,

Sydney Bocik 13:22: are, we are. I just don't want you to, like, also put importance on on things that don't matter right now, just because you think I just, I don't want to do it like, I like product, like, I spent a long time in product.

Sydney Bocik 13:39: to make sure that, like, obviously, the other things are important too, but like, nothing company wise matters without a product structurally,

Speaker 1 13:50: yes, but we can't sell something unless we have the ability to to sell something. So there are times we're going to run things in parallel. So you give me 122, and I will

Sydney Bocik 14:06: sell things. Because when we bring someone in to sell things, then at that point, too,

Speaker 1 14:12: most likely I'll be selling things, probably first so, but yeah, so I'll be selling things, and we have to get legal to onboard it, to actually get to a contract. And then we actually though there are some things that we're just going to need to do without having there's stuff we're going to need to do, right? So yes, I want to have to get a new new contracts, and I'm going to have the new licensing agreements. I want to have to do stripe or bank accounts. I want to have to. I wanted to do pitches and presentations initially, so like, there's just going to be stuff before other people have it that we're going to need to do. There's the just, again, you know all this, but again, I'm trying to make sure we don't get you into being the only person doing things in product and having the same frustrations boil up. So you've given me latitude to help us move forward, and I will take that and I again, just making sure we talk so that I will get one of these again, or one of these for this. I will get this again. I just, yeah, I just bringing it up. It's weird. It seems like we're moving in that direction again. And I was, I just saw it. We're in a tunnel the train rose or light so

Sydney Bocik 15:56: I think you guys are being too mortgagey And, like, not enough focused on the end user. Like, I think I need those. Or you tell me, like, no, Sydney, you're this is still a mortgage thing. Like, we got to focus still on a mortgage thing. And I'm like, Okay, well, this, okay, sure, but like those, I'm not, like, physically writing workflows at that point, you see what I'm saying.

Speaker 1 16:22: So I will say that the v1 is a mortgage thing. But what I really like from AHA is a new definition of the problem, because that expands our solution, right? It becomes more holistic in the definition on affordability from the permanent perspective on the clarity engine, on that, those are going to be fundamental layers that I want to build upon. So if he so defines it to be a mortgage thing, in the mortgage thing, then that's fine, optimization, mortgage understand language and conversation, there's still going to be so much useful, but that I can't control the perspective of and I can influence it, but through land. But the definition of are we really unbiased, is the customer really who we serve,

[Transcript continues through 1:25:26 with discussions on affordability vs fundability, product vision, customer definition, debt optimization, and company structure]