Offered 1% commission for listing

[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]

Anonymous wrote: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.

How is that written in your listing agreement?

[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).

Should I share my other sources of unearned income (e.g., stocks) with an agent as well, or just that resulting from house appreciation?

[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).

Won’t someone think of the poor realtors!

LOL

[Anonymous]

OP, make sure that your realtor understand that s/he is expected to show the house to unrepresented buyers *without* requiring them to sign any documentation or agree to representation.

Also have your realtor hold an open house the first weekend it's listed. That way unrepresented buyers can easily go see it.

Be firm and professional with the realtor and don't share too much personal information. Realtors will try to manipulate you so don't give them much info. They work for you, not the other way around.

[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).

Welcome Back NAnA!

[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).

The homeowner took on risk — the risk that their home value might go down, the risk that they might lose their job and be unable to afford the mortgage, the risk that there would be problems with the home that would be expensive to fix.

What risk did the agent take on? Only the opportunity cost of time spent working to sell house A instead of house B, assuming they even had a choice.

[Anonymous]

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

Sounds like Tanya and Bruce. They have been buying listings in Burke for years. They tried to come into Arlington with their dated marketing and sellers from law firms, consultancies, medicine, and business politely suggested they return to the discounted housing market in Burke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

How is that written in your listing agreement?

Write exactly what you stated, including who benefits from the buyer not asking for a commission: you, your agent, or the buyer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

How is that written in your listing agreement?

Write exactly what you stated, including who benefits from the buyer not asking for a commission: you, your agent, or the buyer?

The buyer and seller benefit from this. Less $ going to realtors = more for the buyer, seller, or both to keep.

[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).

Should I share my other sources of unearned income (e.g., stocks) with an agent as well, or just that resulting from house appreciation?

You haven’t ever heard of 2 and 20, eh?

Or maybe you aren’t wealthy enough.

But yeah, if you are in a hedge fund like me, you are paying 2 and 20. Maybe more if the fund is a quant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, make sure that your realtor understand that s/he is expected to show the house to unrepresented buyers *without* requiring them to sign any documentation or agree to representation.

Also have your realtor hold an open house the first weekend it's listed. That way unrepresented buyers can easily go see it.

Be firm and professional with the realtor and don't share too much personal information. Realtors will try to manipulate you so don't give them much info. They work for you, not the other way around.

Op here. Good point. We have 3 open houses scheduled and expecting it to go before that. The realtor is not Bruce and Tanya but we did interview them. I was surprised to see how accommodating these agents were at lower commission rates and the competition between them is more than before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

How is that written in your listing agreement?

we have asked them to be available for showing in case a potential buyer reaches out to them. There is no buyer commission in my listing and we let buyers decide if they want to ask us or handle it themselves to make their offer look more competitive.

[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).

The homeowner took on risk — the risk that their home value might go down, the risk that they might lose their job and be unable to afford the mortgage, the risk that there would be problems with the home that would be expensive to fix.

What risk did the agent take on? Only the opportunity cost of time spent working to sell house A instead of house B, assuming they even had a choice.

I don't understand why we need to show sympathy to these worthless agents charging 5-6%. This is not a charity and a lot of them don't even have a degree and have no risk.

[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).

Yeah, I pretty much agree with this.

The other place we see this is with financial advisors – so much irrational hatred for them, it’s insane.

And I also have to second that I am neither an agent nor a financial advisor since PP is correct that you automatically get accused of being in one of those professions if you don’t foam at the mouth with hatred toward them.