If something is worth saying it is worth saying multiple times. MHProNews previously reported what ought to be a rallying cry for independent HUD Code manufactured home producers when Frank Rolfe said: “in fact, most of the mobile home [sic] sales in the U.S. are from park owners who will end their orders once their properties become 100% occupied (which is already occurring in some part of the U.S.).” While that may be taken by some as an exaggeration, there has been a steady rise toward full occupancy, as reports like the one linked here or here and a planned update reveal. But there are an array of vexing statements made by Rolfe, which for whatever reason third-party checks by artificial intelligence (AI) reveal have not drawn any obvious response by the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI or for some insiders there: “the Institute”). But the headline topic will focus on an evidence-based case to be made that notorious multi-year MHI member Rolfe (and/or his partner, Dave Reynolds) is (are) correct on some issues and seemingly quite mistaken, wrong, or worse on others. This original reporting which will be bolstered by artificial intelligence supported fact checks and analysis via multiple platforms. It will look at specific claims by Rolfe when he claimed:

• It is a fact that single family homes located next to mobile home parks do, in fact, drop significantly in value, and this statistic means that that the NIMBY concern is grounded in fact.

Excuse me, Frank? What statistic?

Where is your evidence?

While that may be a common misconception, debunked by a range of sources over a period of years (some of those will be linked or referenced herein), as a self-declared expert on manufactured homes and manufactured home communities, Rolfe should be asked to produce evidence. Where are the receipts?

In the absence of evidence from Rolfe beyond mere assertion (which could be associated with various logical fallacies), this report will provide new, unique evidence that will demonstrate once again errors in Rolfe’s claims. In fairness, and to dot the i on part of the headline, where Rolfe seems to have a point is in the following. MHProNews has naturally credited him with his own statements which apparently can be supported with evidence.

This fact-evidence-analysis will look directly at this question. Do single family houses next door to, or in a short distance from, either pre-HUD Code mobile homes on a city lot, or mobile and manufactured homes in a land lease communities impact the value of nearby housing?

Is Rolfe correct when he said: “It is a fact that single family homes located next to mobile home parks do, in fact, drop significantly in value, and this statistic means that that the NIMBY concern is grounded in fact” or was that ignorance, deception, bluster or what? For a fuller context that debunks other claims of his, see this link here.

To underscore the point that this analysis isn’t just one professional’s view, but rather is a logical based upon evidence-realities, third-party artificial intelligence (AI) systems will be used to fact check what MHProNews discovered and is reporting. The human expertise plus AI hybrid model of journalism discussed here, here and below are going to be on full display in this report with analysis.

“Don’t just trust us – check us.” ^©

‘Robust Evolution of Journalism Outshining Solo Human Efforts Prone to Bias or AI-Only Reports Lacking Nuance as seen in Quiver AI’s Weak Cavco Summary-‘It’s Not Just Trust Us—It’s Check Us’

With that preface, let’s dive in.

Part I

1) MHProNews considered two possible aspects of the Rolfe claim about what he mistakenly calls “mobile homes” harm nearby housing values. In the first case, the examples will be of an individual and apparent pre-HUD Code mobile home in a conventional housing neighborhood in Lakeland, FL that has mostly conventional housing on 3 sides and a retail center nearby. The second case will look at more individual instances of not one but two larger land lease manufactured home communities (MHCs – with actually more what Rolfe often mistakenly calls “trailer parks or “mobile home parks” nearby). So, these will be two real-world tests from data gathered this week. But to further underscore the validity of this probe, there will be an AI generated look the Lakeland, FL housing market as compared to the balance of Florida. Restated, several possible ways of looking at Rolfe’s claims are going to be factually explored.

With that understanding, with our signature systematic (step-by-step) of evidence that others can easily follow, let’s dig in

2) This is a screen shot of a Google Street view of an apparently pre-HUD Code mobile home that has had some updates, but it might be an early post-HUD Code manufactured home (if the later, it would have been built on or after June 15, 1976). Note that the housing around this are conventional site-built housing. Some are of an apparently similar age site-built houses as the factory-built structure. But other site-built conventional housing are newer homes than the one in the tannish colored two-story house in the foreground above. The address is 4326 Old Rd 37, Lakeland, FL, 33813.

3) This is a satellite (sat) view of the area around the apparent mobile home shown above. Some homes immediately by and a bit further are examined based on Zillow’s data, which is commonly used in similar such research. Again, the address of the older factory-built structure is 4326 Old Rd 37, Lakeland, FL, 33813. The sat view of #1 below is of the apparent mobile home at 4326 Old Rd 37, Lakeland, FL, 33813. The annotations above and below on-screen shots are all by MHProNews, but will be checked by Copilot.

4) The first Q&A in this report will be with Bing’s Copilot. Questions are by MHProNews, responses are by AI powered Copilot. Newcomers note that it is approaching two years that MHProNews has used Bing’s AI system.  The Copilot logo is added to further clarify the source of the remarks.

Copilot, related to what you just responded to on 4326 Old Highway 37, Lakeland, FL, 33813. If you scan Mobile Home University you will find one or more remarks by Frank Rolfe where he (arguably wrongly) asserted that conventional housing next door to ‘mobile homes’ lose value. That said scan this: https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/4326-Old-Rd-37-33813-Pre-HUD-CodeMobileHomeNextToSiteBuiltHouses-ZillowEstimatesFactCheckOfFrankRolfeOtherSimilarClaims2025-03-18_12-11-33MHProNewsAnnotated2.jpg screen capture of homes per Zillow with Zillow’s estimate of each of the 5 numbered homes value. Note that #5 is diagonally across the street from #1 is the most valuable per sq. foot. The second most valuable is the mobile home (#1). The conventional house that is #4, which is around the corner from #1 – so not neighboring and not visible – is the second lowest in value per square foot. Check the data and confirm the accuracy of those observations. Then, scan the research commissioned by HUD entitled: “Regulatory Barriers to Manufactured Housing Placement in Urban Communities.” It documented the fact that manufactured homes side by side in neighborhoods with conventional housing both tend to appreciate at similar rates. More recently, MHLivingNews unpacked the research by LendingTree that cited other sources that also said that manufactured housing is appreciating at a similar rate as conventional housing. So, while Rolfe may have a point his ironically blaming Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) for the historically low national production of the industry, or his allegation that special interests do not want to solve the affordable housing crisis, on the topic of mobile home or manufactured home values harming the value of nearby conventional housing, he seems to be demonstrably wrong. Check the evidence, explain your findings, and link the results.

5) Follow up with Copilot, as shown. Note that all AI indicate that results should be checked. MHProNews routinely does so, and thus the follow up.

Useful, Copilot. Largely agree, thanks. However, you didn’t link and directly quote Frank Rolfe’s claim about mobile homes harming nearby housing values. Can you provide Rolfe’s specific remark and a source on his site or elsewhere online?

Frank Rolfe has made remarks about mobile homes potentially impacting nearby property values, but his specific claims often appear in the context of broader discussions about the stigma surrounding mobile home parks. For example, on the Mobile Home University website, Rolfe has discussed the challenges and perceptions associated with mobile home parks, including the idea that they can have a negative reputation in some communities. However, I couldn’t locate a direct quote from him explicitly stating that mobile homes harm the value of neighboring conventional housing.

Part II – Another MHProNews Reality Check of Frank Rolfe Thesis/Claims. Conventional Housing Values Across the Street from 2 Manufactured Home Communities (MHCs) in Lakeland, FL on W. Carole St., San Gully Rd., and Golden Rule Ct., Lakeland, FL 338o3.

1) Note that several of these images can be opened to a larger size. In many devices or browsers, click the image and follow the prompts.

2) A new thread with Copilot about the composite annotated screen capture, above.

Ok, still checking the thesis or claim by Frank Rolfe about property values near manufactured home communities, which he has often improperly called “mobile home parks,” or at times even “trailer parks,” as if he is trying to use stigmatized lingo as part of his “moat” (see the thesis you linked to which MHProNews debunked and to which Rolfe, Reynolds and the Manufactured Housing Institute) has not directly responded to challenge. Besides checking the composite document from Zillow which used insights from Gemini and other source(s) as shown for accuracy and how it either supports or cuts against the Rolfe thesis about proximity to manufactured homes undermining value, see if you can find any evidence that Rolfe, his partner Dave Reynolds, anyone else working on behalf of Mobile Home University or Impact Communities, or the Manufactured Housing Institute have responded to those critiques? Link results, as usual.

The composite document you uploaded provides a detailed analysis of property values near manufactured home communities in Lakeland, Florida. It challenges Frank Rolfe’s thesis that proximity to such communities undermines property values. Here’s a summary of the findings:

1. Property Listings and Analysis:
   • The document compares property values near large manufactured home communities with the median home sale price in Lakeland, Florida, which is approximately $323,974 as of February 2025 1.
   • Several properties directly across from manufactured home communities have valuations that align with or exceed the median price per square foot in the area 1.
   • The analysis suggests that Rolfe’s claim about proximity to manufactured homes negatively impacting property values is not supported by the data presented.
2. Market Trends:
   • Homes in Lakeland have sold for 4.4% more than they did a year ago, indicating a positive market trend 1.
   • The median listing home price per square foot was $203, slightly higher than the median price per square foot of $196 for sold homes 1.

Regarding responses to critiques of Rolfe’s thesis:

• Frank Rolfe and Dave Reynolds: There is no evidence of direct responses from Rolfe or Reynolds addressing the specific critiques from MHProNews or similar sources 2 3.
• Mobile Home University: While the platform provides general insights into mobile home park investments, it does not appear to have addressed these critiques directly 4 5.
• Impact Communities: No direct responses to the critiques were found 6 7.
• Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI): MHI has faced criticism for its practices but has not provided direct responses to the specific critiques mentioned 1 8 9.

If you’d like to explore further or need additional insights, let me know!

1 www.manufacturedhomelivingnews.com 2 www.manufacturedhomepronews.com 3 www.manufacturedhomelivingnews.com 4 forum.mobilehomeuniversity.com 5 www.biggerpockets.com 6 ssir.org 7 collectiveimpactforum.org 8 www.manufacturedhomepronews.com 9 www.manufacturedhomepronews.com 

Part III – Google’s AI powered Gemini on Lakeland, FL on 3.19.2025 compared to broader FL market insights.

1) MHProNews Q&A with Gemini. Note this pull quote from Gemini, below: “Information found indicates that the Lakeland housing market is currently more of a buyers market, which tends to keep prices lower.” What Gemini didn’t say is any claim that ‘mobile homes’ near conventional housing were a factor. 

How does the average property values in Lakeland, FL compare to the balance of FL? What helps explain why property values in Lakeland are lower than many other areas in FL?

Sources and related content

Is Lakeland, Florida, expensive to live in?

midflorida.com

 

Lakeland, FL 2025 Housing Market – Realtor.com

www.realtor.com

 

Florida Housing Market – Real Estate – Bankrate

www.bankrate.com

 

What Makes the Housing Market Fluctuate – Del-co Realty Group

www.delcorealty.com

2) As was previously noted by Copilot, the property values of those manufactured homes are comparable or even higher than that of the Lakeland, FL, average. So, while there may be exceptions in either direction, they are apparently for reasons that have little or nothing to do with Rolfe’s claim.

Briefly, Frank Rolfe clearly appears to be factually wrong.

Was Rolfe being deliberately wrong, meaning intentionally misleading or deceptive? Not being mind-readers, MHProNews can’t say.

But what is more certain is that not only was he wrong again on an area of his self-proclaimed expertise, but he is arguably harming the interests of potentially tens of millions of taxpayers, affordable housing seekers, and independent businesses that are seeking to do honest and fair business vs. predatory business and controversy-stirring businesses.

3) Note that the prior HUD Secretary Ben Carson in POTUS Donald J. Trump’s (R) first term extended quotes from his address in 2019 clearly stated federal (FHFA) data revealed manufactured homes and conventional houses were both increasing in value. Dr. Carson pointed out that more manufactured homes could turn more renters into generational wealth building homeowners. Where is Rolfe’s references to such powerful points that undermine his thesis? Other relevant pull quotes are provided below too, from Tobias Peter (AEI Housing Center), Edward Pinto, J.D. (AEI Housing Center), then HUD Sec. Carson, David Dworkin (NHC), Lisa Tyler, Ph.D., and Scholastica Coronation, CRE with the NAR.

3) Are we going to believe remarks and research like those above, or that of self-promoting agenda-driven Frank Rolfe and his partner Dave Reynolds?

Part IV – Additional Information with More MHProNews Analysis and Commentary

1) Rolfe, Partner Reynolds, Peers, and Disciples

An evidence-based case can be made for the following. For examples and evidence, see the linked reports and follow the cross links and quotes. While this is broad brush, it is nevertheless often vexingly true. The unpacking of his claims that ‘mobile home parks’ have a negative impact on site-built housing, shown herein, is the latest evidence for that statement.  AI consistently confirmed the findings of MHProNews (see examples herein and linked).

2) Rolfe and some of his peers and acolytes follow a business model. That business model may include buying a land-lease community as low (e.g.: “cheap”) in price as possible. Those MHC purchases are often made using leverage, i.e.: financing. While the next steps may vary at times and sequence from one location to another, the following are common steps, per Rolfe and/or others.

• Do some improvements, some of which may at times be superficial.
• When there are vacancies (once quite common, perhaps somewhat less so now, but still relatively routine in many of the kinds of deals Rolfe and company are chasing/teaching) fill them with decent to good pre-owned homes if possible, or new homes purchased from the factory that build housing designed to fill vacant home sites in manufactured home communities (MHCs).
• Sell and/or rent that product to fill the site and get the ‘rent meter’ (i.e.: site fees) going up.
• Raise site fees (a.k.a.: ‘lot rent’) as rapidly as deemed possible.

There is more, of course, and some of those insights and details begin to emerge from the articles written by Rolfe, and in some cases, unpacked and examined with a critical view by MHLivingNews and/or MHProNews.

While it is beyond the scope of this specific report, there are good reasons to question if this strategy pushed by Rolfe and others who are routinely MHI members and/or are members of MHI liked state associations could be a slow-motion destabilization of the manufactured home industry in general, and manufactured home communities more specifically. For instance, what happens to land lease communities if site fees get so high that they no longer attract people to replace those who are economically or otherwise evicted?

3) But what a detail minded, and objective truth-seeking, observer may find is that some of what Rolfe has said is mistaken, misleading, or perhaps even a ‘sweet lie:’ deliberately untrue but if told with enough confidence and flair which may sound believable. Those inaccuracies may be designed to land the next mark, err, boot camp ‘student.’ Several of those ‘students’ do buy (and/or invest) and they may go on to be ‘successful,’ as far as that goes. However.

As Gemini observed and xAI’s Grok acknowledged, when an organization is confronted with facts or evidence that they may find difficult or impossible to refute, their attorney(s) may advise them not to respond at all.

4) At every step, this method has certain perceived benefits for Rolfe and Reynolds plus those of like mind, and certain disadvantages for the honorable in the industry at large and is obviously harmful for those on the receiving end (i.e.: residents or “tenants”) of often tough new guidelines for living (i.e.: rules), sharply higher site fees (i.e.: lot rent). Per Rolfe and some data by MHI (which regrettably, may be nicely packaged but is arguably also not always reliable), as much as half of the production of new HUD Code manufactured homes are going into land-leases communities. For example, per the MHI document linked here:

49% of new manufactured homes are placed on private property and 51% are placed in manufactured home communities.

Note that after MHProNews published reports and analysis on that, MHI changed their 2023 quick facts report to reflect 2021 statistics (say, instead of 2022).

Note too that 2023 was a sharply down year for manufactured housing. Why? While many reasons were given, among them was the point that land-lease communities cut back on orders.

5) But what is the fallout of this pattern and business model? And is this, as Rolfe boldly asserts to readers and listeners as if true, the only way to save such once ‘mom-and-pop’ (i.e.: family or individually owned) communities from redevelopment? Let’s look.

As to the last question, there are numbers of operators who don’t hold classes, don’t talk to the media, and are simply doing what most community operators did for decades. That being, have a good working relationship with the majority of a property’s residents. Those may include:

• have modest increases in site fees,
• do improvements as necessary,
• buy-sell-or rent a home to fill vacancies,
• perhaps even do reasonably low cost events (cookouts with fun stuff provided) at the property level to build community and deepen the relationship between management and residents.

Some larger operators may do similarly, only at a greater scale. For example, publicly traded UMH Properties (UMH) has for years been buying often older properties, filling vacancies, doing upgrades, and modestly increasing site fees while working with residents to make each transition to new ownership smoother. Contradicting the Rolfe mantra of “never” building (developing) a new “mobile home park” [sic] (i.e.: land lease manufactured home community), Sam and Eugene Landy have asserted with evidence that their model is more profitable than that of say publicly traded Equity LifeStyle Properties (ELS) or Sun Communities (SUI). While Sun and ELS are arguably far smoother (less blunt, less coarse) than Rolfe and Reynolds, there are seemingly some similarities (middle ground) between what Rolfe and Reynolds, and perhaps operators like Havenpark or RHP Properties may do, and what UMH or others like them do.

Does that model work as advanced by UMH and the Landy’s work? They say yes and provide their evidence. They are publicly traded and are not supposed to make statements that are materially untrue. The Landys are advocating that new land lease community sites be developed and new communities be developed by the thousands. More to the point, they assert that 100,000 new communities should be developed. If the industry collectively did what Landy-led UMH is advocating, it would effectively triple the number of communities in the country.

Nor are the Landys alone in saying that new developments can be more profitable than buying and filling existing ones.

6) Is it any surprise that Rolfe, to protect his self-proclaimed “moat,” attacks the Landy notions as “asinine?” Is it surprising when an illegal drug dealer defends their self-proclaimed turf?

7) Put differently, Rolfe and Reynolds have created a business model that is at odds with what ethically minded industry competitors and colleagues do. It is also apparently harmful to the interests of many MHC residents and thus affordable housing seekers. So, ironically, when Rolfe says there is no desire to solve the affordable housing crisis, he may blast MHI as an example, but aren’t 3 fingers pointing back at himself too? There appears to be plenty of blame to go around.

8) What might be called for the purpose of this illustration the more traditional or UMH model of doing business: be honest and fair to residents and newcomers and have a better public image as a result.

Contrast that with what people firms such as Rolfe, Reynolds, Flagship, ELS, Sun, Havenpark, RHP, and others in that orbit. It is often those firms who end up sued by residents and/or are targeted by public officials for “predatory” behavior.

9) There is arguably no one in the balance of the manufactured housing industry’s trade media (MHI, MHInsider, ManufacturedHomes’ blog, Rolfe/Reynolds via their platforms that include Mobile Home University (MHU) but also includes the Mobile Home Park Store and other sites, George F. Allen’s Community-Investor a.k.a. “EducateMHC,” and insurance broker and attorney Kurt Kelley’s MHReview (MHR). Note that all of these are reportedly MHI members. Of those, perhaps the most balanced is Kelley’s MHR in as much as he will often share an article by the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) in a PDF-style and emailed issue of his digital publication. That said, Kelley’s traffic is apparently at the bottom of those mentioned. For more insights and details on these, see article linked below. Let’s note that per xAI’s Grok and supported by other AI platforms, it is apparent that this news and views platform, MHProNews, has over 6x times the traffic that all of those rivals do combined.

10) Why is MHProNews bigger and more followed? Perhaps the answer is simple. We provide authentic reporting and not just self- or allies-promotional material plus fluff pieces and what often amounts to click bait.

Several of our rivals apparently pay for online ads (MHProNews has done some screen captures of them) to grow their traffic. After years of that and their respective SEO strategies, they are still only collectively 1/6^th (actually, even less, it would seem based on known information. And those rivals won’t respond to those claims, which at least leaves the door open to the notion that the evidence reported by MHProNews which were produced by SimilarWeb and other sources are accurate).

11) To fill in the blanks, while there are others, they are often apparently so modest in size that there is no particular need to invest limited time on them at this time. That said, someone like by Andrew Keel or others may at some point might position themselves to fill the gap when someone like retired Marine G.F. Allen (GFA) dies or actually hands off his business to someone else.

12) To begin to fill the gaps that overview provides, there are also Ken Corbin or Tom Heinemann among others who seem to have an even more modest audience, as very low YouTube video views or other potential metrics suggest.

Possible Takeaways

Among the takeways? In no particular order of importance.

• Honorable businesses apparently need to form their own trade group. While there are reasons (like networking and possible off-market deals) that can be obtained by going to MHI or other MHI-linked meetings and events, in several respects, there should be a growing realization that there is little in common between the predators in MHVille and those who have a more traditional view of giving good service, good value, creating happy customers/residents, and building a better image of the industry.
• The so-called predators and consolidators (often, but not always, one and the same) in MHVille already have a trade group. It is MHI. Despite MHI’s claims that they have a “code of ethical conduct” there is a publicly unchallenged report with expert analysis linked below that makes it clear that the National Communities Council (NCC) “code” is a fig-leaf. There is only one so-called predatory firm that has apparently left, per a source at MHI, and that is Havenpark. It is unknown why they left, but they may have decided as a different MHI member said to MHProNews that they ‘see no value’ to being an MHI member.

• There is already a national trade group for independent producers, and that is MHARR. For a brief time, on the communities’ side, there was NAMHCO. NAMHCO said they left MHI because of a lack of results. No surprise. But NAMHCO apparently made the mistake of trusting Tom Heinemann, a former MHI VP. After bringing Heinemann on board, NAMHCO faded. It may not be technically dead, but there is no known evidence of any publicly reported activity.

Manufactured Home Lending Mystery Spotlight – Tom Heinemann, Heinemann Consulting, Formerly with HUD, and MHI Vice President

1. Absent some shakeup in the industry’s dynamics, Rolfe may end up correct when he says that there is no serious effort to solve the U.S. Affordable Housing Crisis. As with all people or organizations, the ancient wisdom of applying the principle of separating the wheat from the chaff should be used. The way someone like Rolfe gets or stays prominent is accomplished in part by saying some things that are true. That is how paltering and other word-play machinations work. Rolfe has periodically referred to Berkshire Hathaway’s Warren Buffett as a kind of model. That being so, it should be obvious that Buffett has an apparently similar method of saying some things that are true, while saying or doing things that contradict statements and claims. See the linked reports for more details.
2. More and more Americans have come to believe that the “system is rigged,” with surveys saying that supposedly around 70 percent of the population thinks that is true. It remains to be seen if Trump 2.0 will take action. There is a deep political-legal system aspect to this which some of the reports linked below address. It is worth noting that even anti-Trump and left-leaning The American Prospect (TAP) has said that they see evidence that Trump will be more antitrust focused. If so, that may offer hope. MHARR has made the case that the industry’s hope is in Trump 2.0. They are making the argument to engage with them to get them to enforce existing laws that could positively change this dynamic.
3. Rolfe has publicly said in response that MHARR hopes and efforts that they are a fairy tale. Rolfe has said that local governments will never embrace manufactured housing. Rolfe has boldly all but said that they are monopolists but believe that they will not suffer the consequences of acting in a monopolistic fashion. But to be accurate, Rolfe has also contradicted himself at times in the same paragraph, and he has also at times made claims like the one about parks and “mobile homes” reducing nearby property values that when examined in reports like this one are proven to be misleading, gaslighting, paltering, or demonstrably false.

4) That said, how these various dynamics play out remains to be seen. Years of public calls for a truly ethical trade group to supplant what MHI claims to be without actually delivering for non-consolidators has not successfully occurred. The fact that NAMHCO went dormant doesn’t mean it can’t be revived.

7) As long as there are firms that support MHARR, and smaller businesses that want a robust manufactured housing industry instead of a mere shadow of its former glory, the industry will be stuck in low gear. There are many possible leaders (state/regional/national) that might step forward to lead the industry into the kind of “golden age” that President Trump is promising for the U.S.A. Just as there is pushback by entrenched interests in other parts of the U.S. economy and politically, at a niche level, that is to be expected in MHVille. That said, there is no clear signal yet that Trump 2.0 is responding to the industry’s woes. To learn more, see the linked reports. Programming note: Grok AI will be asked to scan and fact check this article once published. That will be posted further below.

Update: 3.19.2025 at about 12:55 PM ET.

Per Grok:

Does It Effectively Debunk Rolfe’s Claims That Mobile or Manufactured Homes Near Conventional Housing Harm Property Values?

Short Answer: Yes, it dismantles Rolfe’s claim with real-world data and third-party backing.

Per Grok:

The debunking’s not just effective; it’s overkill—Rolfe’s claim collapses under scrutiny.

Scroll further below to see the full Q&A between MHProNews and Grok on the above. Promise made, promise kept.

‘Robust Evolution of Journalism Outshining Solo Human Efforts Prone to Bias or AI-Only Reports Lacking Nuance as seen in Quiver AI’s Weak Cavco Summary-‘It’s Not Just Trust Us—It’s Check Us’

Question by MHProNews on this date. Response by xAI’s Grok. “Don’t Just Trust Us, Check Us.” ^©

Grok, let’s shift gears to this new topic. Scan the following. https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/frank-rolfe-arguably-both-right-and-wrong-fact-check-real-world-test-of-rolfe-claim-that-mobile-homes-harm-conventional-housing-values-plus-rolfe-blaming-manufactured-housing-instit/ Follow the links. Double check against relevant sources. Then render your fact check and analysis on these points. 1) Does this faithfully represent the views of Frank Rolfe on this topic? Does it effectively debunk Rolfe’s claims that mobile or manufactured homes near conventional housing somehow harms the property values of neighboring properties? 3) Is it possible that Rolfe’s apparently false claims are designed to benefit his concept that no new communities should be developed? 4) Can you find any disconnects between the facts and evidence presented and what is publicly available on those subjects? Meaning, for instance, doesn’t Copilot and Gemini insights, or your prior ones linked in that, cohesively and faithfully make the case that Rolfe is wrong on “mobile homes” or “mobile home parks” near conventional houses do not in fact harm nearby conventional property values? Didn’t MHLivingNews debunk that notion several times over the years, citing LendingTree, the FHFA, and other sources?

The PDF text of the above exchange is found here. Will MHProNews do this level of detail every time? No, this takes time. But we will provide, as we have for years, the most evidence, the most third-party sources, properly identified and verifiable by readers. Unlike numbers of others in media, here it is: “Don’t just trust us, test us.” ©

Again, our thanks to free email subscribers and all readers like you, as well as our tipsters/sources, sponsors and God for making and keeping us the runaway number one source for authentic “News through the lens of manufactured homes and factory-built housing” © where “We Provide, You Decide.” © ## (Affordable housing, manufactured homes, reports, fact-checks, analysis, and commentary. Third-party images or content are provided under fair use guidelines for media.) See Related Reports, further below. Text/image boxes often are hot-linked to other reports that can be access by clicking on them.)

By L.A. “Tony” Kovach – for MHProNews.com.

Tony earned a journalism scholarship and earned numerous awards in history and in manufactured housing.

For example, he earned the prestigious Lottinville Award in history from the University of Oklahoma, where he studied history and business management. He’s a managing member and co-founder of LifeStyle Factory Homes, LLC, the parent company to MHProNews, and MHLivingNews.com.

This article reflects the LLC’s and/or the writer’s position and may or may not reflect the views of sponsors or supporters.

http://latonykovach.com

Connect on LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/latonykovach

Related References:

The text/image boxes below are linked to other reports, which can be accessed by clicking on them.’

HUD Secretary Scott Turner–‘I Don’t Ever Want to be Comfortable or Complacent’ ‘We have a Victorious Attitude Regardless of Difficulties’ ‘We Can Reduce Burden to Build Manufactured Housing’-FEA

Investopedia and NPR Probe ‘Severe Housing Shortage’ Asking – Will Trump and Republicans Help or Harm? Broad Look plus Manufactured Housing FEA with Sunday Weekly MHVille Headlines Recap