Buyer's agent fees

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We plan to list our $1.5m home next month. Offering 1.75% to lifting agent and ZERO to buyers. We are in desirable neighborhood and home expected to sell over $1.5m. We will look at all offers and may kick back a few crumbs to the buyers agent, but we are talking something like $5k, not anything like 1%. If the buyer wants our home they can pay their damn agent. Not our problem - ah… that the whole point of the judgement?

Hey greedy re agent I don’t need your best wishes. We have an honorable realtor who will list for 1.75% with no buyer fee cited. In fact there are plenty of hard working listing agents who will list for 1%. The market has spoken.

Good luck with that. It will be interesting to see how it works out for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Am planning to list either 2025/2026. Will have it in the listing that offers should include their requested buyers fee. So it will play one factor among others in the offers. If someone offers a great price and no buyers fee needed we will look very closely at it. If someone offers the highest price and a 2% for buyers fee but we end up with more, we'll look closely at it. It's all about what we walk away with at the end of the day.

Do agree in principle buyers need to assume some of the costs themselves. Not clear on the role agents play that justifies setting aside 5-4% in commission. Like most people, we found our house, not the agent. The agent was a highly reputable agent but pretty much didn't do much other than fill out some paperwork. Impressive.

I am a listing agent within a small brokerage and I don’t see any benefit in sellers to commit paying a fixed buyer broker fee. What a seller usually care about is the net price and terms.

On my last few listings I only got a couple of inquiries from buyer agents asking whether the seller was offering a fixed amount of buyer agent commission upfront. My response is always something like “The seller will be happy to consider an offer with a request for closing cost assistance towards a buyer agent fee. The seller cares about terms and the net price when comparing offers. We would love to see an offer from your client.”

In my experience most buyers still use (and benefit) from a buyer agent. Most buyer agents just show the home and then the buyer asks for closing costs in their offer (that they may or may not be using towards their agent fees.)

Sellers benefit when encouraging everyone to view and make offers on their home - regardless of whether they have an agent or not. However, up to this point, I haven't found a reason to recommend a seller make an *upfront* offer of compensation to buyer agents.

So, find and pay for a listing agent that will give you the best value. Warmly welcome anyone to view and tour your home. Review the offers for overall best terms and net price, and don’t worry about how much the buyer agent is paid on the “buyer side” of the closing statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m interviewing agents for a spring listing. We have listened to so many agents who are ignoring the settlement and insisting on ancient 5-6% riff off fee. We have now started to record the agents citing as such. Yes…we do plan to file civil suit. These morher$$foc$ agents are in for it.

No surprise. RE agents are RE agents for a reason - not the sharpest knives in the drawer. I’m certain they are boldly citing fees - contrary to the law. Great idea to record the conversations and turn into your attorney, legal authorities, etc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tried offering 2% when I sold and my house sat in a hot neighborhood - pretty sure the local realtors were blacklisting it. Was told by my realtor that I needed to go up to at least 2.5% because 2% simply wasn’t done in the neighborhood. I did and sold within a few weeks, although the buyers agent complained that I wasn’t offering 3%!

Another house in the neighborhood being sold by a discount agent also took much longer than normal to sell and ultimately the buyer was represented by another discount agent. I had been by a top selling agent whom I had interviewed but didn’t hire that she would steer buyers away from discount agents because they and their sellers were “difficult.”

Sample size of 2, but I would be careful out there. I think it’s disgusting, but seems the reality right now, at least certain places.

Another liar. If you're in a neighborhood someone wants to live in, a buyer will find that house on Redfin or Zillow. It's impossible for buyer's agents to "blacklist" your home in this day and age, PP. You are clearly a 60+ year old real estate agent.[/quote

Evidence of buyers agents blacklisting homes was presented at Moehrl v. NAR. The audio recordings are particularly incriminating, see Agent Call 1 @1:00

https://soundcloud.com/rexrealestate
https://www.inman.com./2022/07/08/more-than-700-agent-steering-calls-suggest-price-fixing-lawyers-charge/
https://www.reddit.com/r/REBubble/comments/1c...e_calls_of_realtors/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tried offering 2% when I sold and my house sat in a hot neighborhood - pretty sure the local realtors were blacklisting it. Was told by my realtor that I needed to go up to at least 2.5% because 2% simply wasn’t done in the neighborhood. I did and sold within a few weeks, although the buyers agent complained that I wasn’t offering 3%!

Another house in the neighborhood being sold by a discount agent also took much longer than normal to sell and ultimately the buyer was represented by another discount agent. I had been by a top selling agent whom I had interviewed but didn’t hire that she would steer buyers away from discount agents because they and their sellers were “difficult.”

Sample size of 2, but I would be careful out there. I think it’s disgusting, but seems the reality right now, at least certain places.

Another liar. If you're in a neighborhood someone wants to live in, a buyer will find that house on Redfin or Zillow. It's impossible for buyer's agents to "blacklist" your home in this day and age, PP. You are clearly a 60+ year old real estate agent.

Evidence of buyers agents blacklisting homes was presented at Moehrl v. NAR. The audio recordings are particularly incriminating, see Agent Call 1 @1:00

https://soundcloud.com/rexrealestate
https://www.inman.com./2022/07/08/more-than-7...xing-lawyers-charge/
https://www.reddit.com/r/REBubble/comments/1c...e_calls_of_realtors/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am planning to list either 2025/2026. Will have it in the listing that offers should include their requested buyers fee. So it will play one factor among others in the offers. If someone offers a great price and no buyers fee needed we will look very closely at it. If someone offers the highest price and a 2% for buyers fee but we end up with more, we'll look closely at it. It's all about what we walk away with at the end of the day.

Do agree in principle buyers need to assume some of the costs themselves. Not clear on the role agents play that justifies setting aside 5-4% in commission. Like most people, we found our house, not the agent. The agent was a highly reputable agent but pretty much didn't do much other than fill out some paperwork. Impressive.

I am a listing agent within a small brokerage and I don’t see any benefit in sellers to commit paying a fixed buyer broker fee. What a seller usually care about is the net price and terms.

On my last few listings I only got a couple of inquiries from buyer agents asking whether the seller was offering a fixed amount of buyer agent commission upfront. My response is always something like “The seller will be happy to consider an offer with a request for closing cost assistance towards a buyer agent fee. The seller cares about terms and the net price when comparing offers. We would love to see an offer from your client.”

In my experience most buyers still use (and benefit) from a buyer agent. Most buyer agents just show the home and then the buyer asks for closing costs in their offer (that they may or may not be using towards their agent fees.)

Sellers benefit when encouraging everyone to view and make offers on their home - regardless of whether they have an agent or not. However, up to this point, I haven't found a reason to recommend a seller make an *upfront* offer of compensation to buyer agents.

So, find and pay for a listing agent that will give you the best value. Warmly welcome anyone to view and tour your home. Review the offers for overall best terms and net price, and don’t worry about how much the buyer agent is paid on the “buyer side” of the closing statement.

Glad to see an agent who is actually working in the best interests of their client! This is exactly the right response, and of course it makes zero sense to close off offers which may have better net terms. In the long run, agents who do this will succeed, but it will still take some effort, time and I assume further legal action at some point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am planning to list either 2025/2026. Will have it in the listing that offers should include their requested buyers fee. So it will play one factor among others in the offers. If someone offers a great price and no buyers fee needed we will look very closely at it. If someone offers the highest price and a 2% for buyers fee but we end up with more, we'll look closely at it. It's all about what we walk away with at the end of the day.

Do agree in principle buyers need to assume some of the costs themselves. Not clear on the role agents play that justifies setting aside 5-4% in commission. Like most people, we found our house, not the agent. The agent was a highly reputable agent but pretty much didn't do much other than fill out some paperwork. Impressive.

I am a listing agent within a small brokerage and I don’t see any benefit in sellers to commit paying a fixed buyer broker fee. What a seller usually care about is the net price and terms.

On my last few listings I only got a couple of inquiries from buyer agents asking whether the seller was offering a fixed amount of buyer agent commission upfront. My response is always something like “The seller will be happy to consider an offer with a request for closing cost assistance towards a buyer agent fee. The seller cares about terms and the net price when comparing offers. We would love to see an offer from your client.”

In my experience most buyers still use (and benefit) from a buyer agent. Most buyer agents just show the home and then the buyer asks for closing costs in their offer (that they may or may not be using towards their agent fees.)

Sellers benefit when encouraging everyone to view and make offers on their home - regardless of whether they have an agent or not. However, up to this point, I haven't found a reason to recommend a seller make an *upfront* offer of compensation to buyer agents.

So, find and pay for a listing agent that will give you the best value. Warmly welcome anyone to view and tour your home. Review the offers for overall best terms and net price, and don’t worry about how much the buyer agent is paid on the “buyer side” of the closing statement.

Glad to see an agent who is actually working in the best interests of their client! This is exactly the right response, and of course it makes zero sense to close off offers which may have better net terms. In the long run, agents who do this will succeed, but it will still take some effort, time and I assume further legal action at some point.[/quote

+1. Above is an honorable agent. Provide best advice to your client.

[Anonymous]

Funny. Why use an agent? Sell yourself and pay real estate attorney for legal/contract work.

Anonymous wrote:What's the latest on buyer's agent fees in Montgomery County? What I'm seeing in other places is that agent agreements are entered into on a per house basis, but almost all houses are offering buyer agent comp paid by the seller just as before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am planning to list either 2025/2026. Will have it in the listing that offers should include their requested buyers fee. So it will play one factor among others in the offers. If someone offers a great price and no buyers fee needed we will look very closely at it. If someone offers the highest price and a 2% for buyers fee but we end up with more, we'll look closely at it. It's all about what we walk away with at the end of the day.

Do agree in principle buyers need to assume some of the costs themselves. Not clear on the role agents play that justifies setting aside 5-4% in commission. Like most people, we found our house, not the agent. The agent was a highly reputable agent but pretty much didn't do much other than fill out some paperwork. Impressive.

I am a listing agent within a small brokerage and I don’t see any benefit in sellers to commit paying a fixed buyer broker fee. What a seller usually care about is the net price and terms.

On my last few listings I only got a couple of inquiries from buyer agents asking whether the seller was offering a fixed amount of buyer agent commission upfront. My response is always something like “The seller will be happy to consider an offer with a request for closing cost assistance towards a buyer agent fee. The seller cares about terms and the net price when comparing offers. We would love to see an offer from your client.”

In my experience most buyers still use (and benefit) from a buyer agent. Most buyer agents just show the home and then the buyer asks for closing costs in their offer (that they may or may not be using towards their agent fees.)

Sellers benefit when encouraging everyone to view and make offers on their home - regardless of whether they have an agent or not. However, up to this point, I haven't found a reason to recommend a seller make an *upfront* offer of compensation to buyer agents.

So, find and pay for a listing agent that will give you the best value. Warmly welcome anyone to view and tour your home. Review the offers for overall best terms and net price, and don’t worry about how much the buyer agent is paid on the “buyer side” of the closing statement.

You sound like a very calm experienced agent. I tried to sell a home once without an agent about 17 years ago in a different market - not my choice but we got an offer on our home that was off the market. Eventually the seller asked us to draft all the contracts and wanted the full 5% refunded to them. We found that it was impossible to satisfy them because they wanted the realtor fees refunded, wanted us to do about 20-30 hours worth of work and then wanted the house at some ridiculously low price because they needed a deal since there were no agents. We didn't even have to sell so it was just a big chaotic mess. We realized that as the seller, there was no way to come out ahead without an agent helping us. My point is that an experienced selling agent gets the deal done by bringing logic, fairness and calmness to a transaction that can be emotional. They deserve to be well compensated.

That said, I think in higher end markets like DC, maybe our commission percentage is a bit high but nothing wrong with negotiating that up front!

And we also had an agent on a different transaction who made us make up .5% of the fee because a bank owning a foreclosure offered less than the 3% she wanted. We did it but we felt we had no choice. I wouldn't do that again. i felt she should have told us this when we showed the house or put it in the contract.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tried offering 2% when I sold and my house sat in a hot neighborhood - pretty sure the local realtors were blacklisting it. Was told by my realtor that I needed to go up to at least 2.5% because 2% simply wasn’t done in the neighborhood. I did and sold within a few weeks, although the buyers agent complained that I wasn’t offering 3%!

Another house in the neighborhood being sold by a discount agent also took much longer than normal to sell and ultimately the buyer was represented by another discount agent. I had been by a top selling agent whom I had interviewed but didn’t hire that she would steer buyers away from discount agents because they and their sellers were “difficult.”

Sample size of 2, but I would be careful out there. I think it’s disgusting, but seems the reality right now, at least certain places.

Another liar. If you're in a neighborhood someone wants to live in, a buyer will find that house on Redfin or Zillow. It's impossible for buyer's agents to "blacklist" your home in this day and age, PP. You are clearly a 60+ year old real estate agent.

Evidence of buyers agents blacklisting homes was presented at Moehrl v. NAR. The audio recordings are particularly incriminating, see Agent Call 1 @1:00

https://soundcloud.com/rexrealestate
https://www.inman.com./2022/07/08/more-than-7...xing-lawyers-charge/
https://www.reddit.com/r/REBubble/comments/1c...e_calls_of_realtors/

way to go. This would be excellent in using it against other crooked agents.

[Anonymous]

We just had an agent tell us that their (large!) brokerage firm is requiring sellers to offer 2.5% to the buyer’s agent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We just had an agent tell us that their (large!) brokerage firm is requiring sellers to offer 2.5% to the buyer’s agent.

Well, a brokerage firm is allowed to set their own policy like that. I would look for a smaller firm that has a low overhead and doesn’t depend on the team model. There is likely an incentive (and probably pressure) to have listing agents constantly feed leads to buyer agents in the same team and brokerage (and to affiliates closing companies and lenders.)

Listing agent in small firm posting earlier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We just had an agent tell us that their (large!) brokerage firm is requiring sellers to offer 2.5% to the buyer’s agent.

Well, a brokerage firm is allowed to set their own policy like that. I would look for a smaller firm that has a low overhead and doesn’t depend on the team model. There is likely an incentive (and probably pressure) to have listing agents constantly feed leads to buyer agents in the same team and brokerage (and to affiliates closing companies and lenders.)

Listing agent in small firm posting earlier.

Not sure I agree with that when it comes to setting SOMEONE ELSE'S pay. They of course can say "our fee as seller's agent is 2.5% across the board, we feel we add significant value and need a consistent structure for transparency and fairness to our clients"

Now basically trying to force a seller to offer a specific amount to someone they have no contractual relationship with, that sounds like...collusion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We just had an agent tell us that their (large!) brokerage firm is requiring sellers to offer 2.5% to the buyer’s agent.

Well, a brokerage firm is allowed to set their own policy like that. I would look for a smaller firm that has a low overhead and doesn’t depend on the team model. There is likely an incentive (and probably pressure) to have listing agents constantly feed leads to buyer agents in the same team and brokerage (and to affiliates closing companies and lenders.)

Listing agent in small firm posting earlier.

Not sure I agree with that when it comes to setting SOMEONE ELSE'S pay. They of course can say "our fee as seller's agent is 2.5% across the board, we feel we add significant value and need a consistent structure for transparency and fairness to our clients"

Now basically trying to force a seller to offer a specific amount to someone they have no contractual relationship with, that sounds like...collusion.

*Within* a brokerage the company have a lot of freedom to set their own policies and pricing to consumers. Including a policy saying “our firm charges 4percent and we make a unilateral offer to buyer agents of 2 percent.” Agents have to abide by those policies if they want to affiliate with that brokerage (I use the word affiliate as agents are independent contractors in vast majority of cases.)

A brokerage makes policies based on the type of real estate they practice and their target clients etc. Lots of different models and that is a good thing.

The collusion and antitrust issues apply when there is an understanding or agreement *between* firms. Collusion and antitrust is often hard to prove in these cases.

It is very hard for a seller to know what is typical or common these days and what rates will generate the highest net for them. For example, if a prospective client asks “what is the typical buyer commission offered” or what is “average”, those numbers would no longer be easily available publicly or via the MLS (they are not reliably found in the MLS system anymore.)

In a brokerage like what you describe (insisting on a unilateral 2.5% commission to a buyer agent), an honest answer could contribute in keeping the old price levels and structures in place. Large well-known brands and franchises will likely have meaningful internal statistics to share to support the commission levels they ask. As a consumer, you only have anecdotal evidence and no way to know if you will net more whether you offer buyer commission or not.

As I said earlier, based on my listings and sales, I do not see a reason to offer a unilateral offer for buyer commission for my typical client. And I don’t believe it is necessary for the vast number of sellers either.

[Anonymous]

It sounds like collusion again.

But this went to the Supreme Court and they ruled on it.

It comes back to the dummies who just give in to continued high commission structures. If you are stuck with this in the big brokerage firms then find small local ones who will work with you for a reasonable fee.