Offered 1% commission for listing

[Anonymous]

Planning to sell our house in Burke, VA and quoted 1% as listing commission from an agent very well-known in the neighborhood. Staging of $2k is extra but we won't need it in this case and she is also paying for pictures. We might have to pay buyers' agent commission if they ask for it and also we might not if we get a few good offers. Can someone please update me what else I should look for?

[Anonymous]

That's not bad. Can you share the name of the agent if it is allowed here?

[Anonymous]

I don’t understand what you’re saying about paying buyer agent commission. If you are willing to pay it, let that be known as it will increase your buyer pool.

Am assuming the agent is also a broker. Otherwise the economics of a 1% listing fee doesn’t make a lot of sense.

[Anonymous]

Op here. There is a good demand for houses in my neighborhood and my agent suggested that we let buyer's agent ask for commission. He suspects that some of the buyers won't ask for commission for their agent to make their offer more competitive.

[Anonymous]

Goo strategy. Buyer can give $500-1000 to an agent to write the contract and no need for asking 1% commission from seller.

[Anonymous]

For $2K you can buy a lot of new stuff to decorate.

[Anonymous]

I am just amazed to see how low the commission has come down. A couple of years back, useless agents used to quote 5-6% of the listing price and now it is 1% or close to that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am just amazed to see how low the commission has come down. A couple of years back, useless agents used to quote 5-6% of the listing price and now it is 1% or close to that.

With technology and companies like Redfin it took longer time than I expected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just amazed to see how low the commission has come down. A couple of years back, useless agents used to quote 5-6% of the listing price and now it is 1% or close to that.

With technology and companies like Redfin it took longer time than I expected.

Because it was a monopoly. That’s exactly why it was found to be illegal. With Redfin and tech, the fees should have been 1-2%, but they hadn’t budged at all off the 6% they’d been for 50 years. The only reason is because of price collusion/monopoly in the industry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just amazed to see how low the commission has come down. A couple of years back, useless agents used to quote 5-6% of the listing price and now it is 1% or close to that.

With technology and companies like Redfin it took longer time than I expected.

Because it was a monopoly. That’s exactly why it was found to be illegal. With Redfin and tech, the fees should have been 1-2%, but they hadn’t budged at all off the 6% they’d been for 50 years. The only reason is because of price collusion/monopoly in the industry.

This

[Anonymous]

The best part is that it is getting rid of the low performing agents who did nothing but jam up the copying machines with their kid's art projects and mother's tax returns. Fewer than ten agents in our office of about 50 do the production. We have pared down to a small office and told to work from home. Happy to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just amazed to see how low the commission has come down. A couple of years back, useless agents used to quote 5-6% of the listing price and now it is 1% or close to that.

With technology and companies like Redfin it took longer time than I expected.

Because it was a monopoly. That’s exactly why it was found to be illegal. With Redfin and tech, the fees should have been 1-2%, but they hadn’t budged at all off the 6% they’d been for 50 years. The only reason is because of price collusion/monopoly in the industry.

If houses still cost $100,000, you would not be seeing 1%.

Sellers are so greedy. They got all this equity doing nothing but now are all resentful that someone performing a professional service also benefit from inflated prices. They act like they’re being cheated or something out of money they earned. It’s pathetic.

No, I am not an agent. (Since invariably some pea brained twatwaffle resorts to that retort).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just amazed to see how low the commission has come down. A couple of years back, useless agents used to quote 5-6% of the listing price and now it is 1% or close to that.

With technology and companies like Redfin it took longer time than I expected.

Because it was a monopoly. That’s exactly why it was found to be illegal. With Redfin and tech, the fees should have been 1-2%, but they hadn’t budged at all off the 6% they’d been for 50 years. The only reason is because of price collusion/monopoly in the industry.

If houses still cost $100,000, you would not be seeing 1%.

Sellers are so greedy. They got all this equity doing nothing but now are all resentful that someone performing a professional service also benefit from inflated prices. They act like they’re being cheated or something out of money they earned. It’s pathetic.

No, I am not an agent. (Since invariably some pea brained twatwaffle resorts to that retort).

Wait, what? You think that an agent deserves to share in the same price appreciation that the homeowner does? Just because….. the homeowner didn’t do anything to earn the price increase so the agent likewise should get a piece? This makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just amazed to see how low the commission has come down. A couple of years back, useless agents used to quote 5-6% of the listing price and now it is 1% or close to that.

With technology and companies like Redfin it took longer time than I expected.

Because it was a monopoly. That’s exactly why it was found to be illegal. With Redfin and tech, the fees should have been 1-2%, but they hadn’t budged at all off the 6% they’d been for 50 years. The only reason is because of price collusion/monopoly in the industry.

If houses still cost $100,000, you would not be seeing 1%.

Sellers are so greedy. They got all this equity doing nothing but now are all resentful that someone performing a professional service also benefit from inflated prices. They act like they’re being cheated or something out of money they earned. It’s pathetic.

No, I am not an agent. (Since invariably some pea brained twatwaffle resorts to that retort).

Wait, what? You think that an agent deserves to share in the same price appreciation that the homeowner does? Just because….. the homeowner didn’t do anything to earn the price increase so the agent likewise should get a piece? This makes no sense.

+1 It only makes sense to realtors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just amazed to see how low the commission has come down. A couple of years back, useless agents used to quote 5-6% of the listing price and now it is 1% or close to that.

With technology and companies like Redfin it took longer time than I expected.

Because it was a monopoly. That’s exactly why it was found to be illegal. With Redfin and tech, the fees should have been 1-2%, but they hadn’t budged at all off the 6% they’d been for 50 years. The only reason is because of price collusion/monopoly in the industry.

If houses still cost $100,000, you would not be seeing 1%.

Sellers are so greedy. They got all this equity doing nothing but now are all resentful that someone performing a professional service also benefit from inflated prices. They act like they’re being cheated or something out of money they earned. It’s pathetic.

No, I am not an agent. (Since invariably some pea brained twatwaffle resorts to that retort).

Won’t someone think of the poor realtors!