Buyer's agent fees

[Anonymous]

It’s not collusion. It was never collusion. Calm down.

Things aren’t going to change very much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not collusion. It was never collusion. Calm down.

Things aren’t going to change very much.

I believe "conspiracy" was the language used in the jury instructions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have real world data?

Agents from both Compass and Sotheby's are insistent that they are not permitted by their brokerage to agree to less than 2.5%

Compass is the worst. I would never, ever work with a Compass agent. bunch of sleaze bags.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not collusion. It was never collusion. Calm down.

Things aren’t going to change very much.

No good point, price fixing is a more accurate description

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

PP. The most obvious reason is, buyer agents were steering clients away from (blacklisting) lower commission listings. Large well-known real estate brokerages don't need legal discovery to know this; they know this like large Wall street firms know about insider trading.

[Anonymous]

Call it whatever you want, it slimy. Can’t trust the real estate industry.

[Anonymous]

Consumers should hold the line: Offer a fee to your listing agent - at time of listing. Buyers agent fees are negotiatable at a later process. DO NOT COMMITT anything up front.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not collusion. It was never collusion. Calm down.

Things aren’t going to change very much.

It absolutely is collusion. The consumer is boxed in where they can not make a choice or negotiate in good faith. In no other consumer transaction does the seller control how much the buyer pays for service that is supposed to serve the buyer but actually doesn’t. The buying agent presents themselves as representing the buyer but they do not.

The seller/ buyer commission structure is designed solely to push more money into brokerages. It’s fraudulently presented as separate services when it is not. The existence of 2 agents even though one is not representing their client creates the perception that the commission is worth double.

If commissions are solely based on the listing agent, and the listing agent has to actually sell the house by showing it to buyers it would make sense. However this cuts the number of transactions available to brokers in half. Inventory is low enough that competition would keep rates at 2% for listing agent. Without the buying agent scam, brokerages would cut their opportunities for revenue in half.

The other problem with buying agents is that their value to brokerages and the listing agents is that they push deals through by encouraging buyers to concede contingencies, spend more, never walk away, etc whether this is in the interest of the buyer or not.

[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.

They will be out of business soon.

[Anonymous]

This will change, it’s going to take time though. The consumer will have to drive this and will figure it out once more and more people avoid the traditional model. There will be a tipping point. May be a few years down the line.

[Anonymous]

We are filing suit against five listing agents who have quoted 4.5 to 5% total fee to include buyer agent comp. They all cite that “nothing has changed” and that if we don’t specify a buyers agent fee in the listing, our home will not sell. We are downsizing, planning to sell our longtime family home. Thi is highway robbery. Our son is an excellent attorney so not costing us much here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are filing suit against five listing agents who have quoted 4.5 to 5% total fee to include buyer agent comp. They all cite that “nothing has changed” and that if we don’t specify a buyers agent fee in the listing, our home will not sell. We are downsizing, planning to sell our longtime family home. Thi is highway robbery. Our son is an excellent attorney so not costing us much here.

Really? In the DC metro area? Agents are not allowed to put the buyer agent commission offered in the mls anymore but are allowed to share the buyer commission offers other places.

You tried small brokerages? 5 listing agents ones told you this? How many told you that it wasn’t necessary to offer buyer compensation upfront?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are filing suit against five listing agents who have quoted 4.5 to 5% total fee to include buyer agent comp. They all cite that “nothing has changed” and that if we don’t specify a buyers agent fee in the listing, our home will not sell. We are downsizing, planning to sell our longtime family home. Thi is highway robbery. Our son is an excellent attorney so not costing us much here.

This sounds fake.

-Strong industry critic, willing to reconsider with convincing details

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are filing suit against five listing agents who have quoted 4.5 to 5% total fee to include buyer agent comp. They all cite that “nothing has changed” and that if we don’t specify a buyers agent fee in the listing, our home will not sell. We are downsizing, planning to sell our longtime family home. Thi is highway robbery. Our son is an excellent attorney so not costing us much here.

Spoken with several agents who have all said the same

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are filing suit against five listing agents who have quoted 4.5 to 5% total fee to include buyer agent comp. They all cite that “nothing has changed” and that if we don’t specify a buyers agent fee in the listing, our home will not sell. We are downsizing, planning to sell our longtime family home. Thi is highway robbery. Our son is an excellent attorney so not costing us much here.

Really? In the DC metro area? Agents are not allowed to put the buyer agent commission offered in the mls anymore but are allowed to share the buyer commission offers other places.

You tried small brokerages? 5 listing agents ones told you this? How many told you that it wasn’t necessary to offer buyer compensation upfront?

They all told us nothing changing for sellers. They still have to pay the customary 2.5 to 3% buyer agent fees so we need to commit to a total fee of 4.5 to 5% to list home. There was no talk of were this info was disclosed other than stating that if we’re not prepared to pay the total fees buyer agents would not show our home. This is crazy and insulting and we are going to do something about it.