When we did this, their "private exclusive" list was either teardowns or places that the sellers didn't want to clean up to sell, which in my mind read as lazy and I didn't want to buy from a lazy homeowner.

You never have to agree to an Open House, under any circumstance, IF you don't want to.

^seller is sophisticated

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hoping to sell off market. I know that Compass has private exclusive listings and I have talked to an agent about that. Seems like that could be somewhat limiting - as in you'll only see it if you're a buyer working with a Compass agent. Any other brokerages (or agents) that do off market or pre-market very well? Our house is in a highly desirable neighborhood and should sell quickly if we get a decent number of eyes on it. Trying to avoid listing for a couple reasons but will resort to it if needed. TIA!

Lol no they don’t. Completely unethical.

Compass has many, many private exclusive listings as do most of the larger brokerages. So "lol" at you. There is nothing unethical about it.

Actually, there is. It's a mechanism for taking advantage of unsophisticated and gullible sellers, no more, no less. No rational person wants less money for their property instead of more; "exclusive" listings practically guarantee a lower sales price based on simple market dynamics. It's incontrovertible that fewer buyers almost always means a lower price. Agents acting in the best interests of their clients will expose their listings to the widest possible market, not to a smaller number of buyers. The only reason to limit the buying pool is to maximize brokerage profit by keeping both the buy side and the sell side in-house. That does not benefit the seller, but the brokerage and its agents. That's unethical in my book unless the seller fully understand what they are giving up. I doubt most do, because they are acting against their own economic self-interest when they do so. They go for it because the brokerage has tricked them into thinking they'll do just as well financially with the exclusive listing, which is very unlikely.

If you are against private listings, don't utilize that type of transaction, but to claim it's a mechanism for taking advantage of unsophisticated and gullible sellers is wrong. I'm sure this buyer was quite sophisticated: https://www.instagram.com/p/DHERjaBxu09/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hoping to sell off market. I know that Compass has private exclusive listings and I have talked to an agent about that. Seems like that could be somewhat limiting - as in you'll only see it if you're a buyer working with a Compass agent. Any other brokerages (or agents) that do off market or pre-market very well? Our house is in a highly desirable neighborhood and should sell quickly if we get a decent number of eyes on it. Trying to avoid listing for a couple reasons but will resort to it if needed. TIA!

Lol no they don’t. Completely unethical.

Compass has many, many private exclusive listings as do most of the larger brokerages. So "lol" at you. There is nothing unethical about it.

Actually, there is. It's a mechanism for taking advantage of unsophisticated and gullible sellers, no more, no less. No rational person wants less money for their property instead of more; "exclusive" listings practically guarantee a lower sales price based on simple market dynamics. It's incontrovertible that fewer buyers almost always means a lower price. Agents acting in the best interests of their clients will expose their listings to the widest possible market, not to a smaller number of buyers. The only reason to limit the buying pool is to maximize brokerage profit by keeping both the buy side and the sell side in-house. That does not benefit the seller, but the brokerage and its agents. That's unethical in my book unless the seller fully understand what they are giving up. I doubt most do, because they are acting against their own economic self-interest when they do so. They go for it because the brokerage has tricked them into thinking they'll do just as well financially with the exclusive listing, which is very unlikely.

I know some extremely well educated, sophisticated people who did a private listing, and they knew exactly what they were giving up. No trickery involved. I hate agents for lots of reasons, and I think they are vastly overpaid for what they do, but I can't fault them for offering a private listing as an option.

+1 to above.

It make sense for agents to want to keep both sides in house so they make 2.5%+2.5% instead of just the 2.5%.

You need to sell the house twice as high to earn that other 2.5% of commission otherwise, if selling to the public.

Of course I'd take 5% of 1M over 2.5% of 1.2M, 1.4M, even 1.5M or whatever in the most competitive market.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hoping to sell off market. I know that Compass has private exclusive listings and I have talked to an agent about that. Seems like that could be somewhat limiting - as in you'll only see it if you're a buyer working with a Compass agent. Any other brokerages (or agents) that do off market or pre-market very well? Our house is in a highly desirable neighborhood and should sell quickly if we get a decent number of eyes on it. Trying to avoid listing for a couple reasons but will resort to it if needed. TIA!

Lol no they don’t. Completely unethical.

Compass has many, many private exclusive listings as do most of the larger brokerages. So "lol" at you. There is nothing unethical about it.

Actually, there is. It's a mechanism for taking advantage of unsophisticated and gullible sellers, no more, no less. No rational person wants less money for their property instead of more; "exclusive" listings practically guarantee a lower sales price based on simple market dynamics. It's incontrovertible that fewer buyers almost always means a lower price. Agents acting in the best interests of their clients will expose their listings to the widest possible market, not to a smaller number of buyers. The only reason to limit the buying pool is to maximize brokerage profit by keeping both the buy side and the sell side in-house. That does not benefit the seller, but the brokerage and its agents. That's unethical in my book unless the seller fully understand what they are giving up. I doubt most do, because they are acting against their own economic self-interest when they do so. They go for it because the brokerage has tricked them into thinking they'll do just as well financially with the exclusive listing, which is very unlikely.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hoping to sell off market. I know that Compass has private exclusive listings and I have talked to an agent about that. Seems like that could be somewhat limiting - as in you'll only see it if you're a buyer working with a Compass agent. Any other brokerages (or agents) that do off market or pre-market very well? Our house is in a highly desirable neighborhood and should sell quickly if we get a decent number of eyes on it. Trying to avoid listing for a couple reasons but will resort to it if needed. TIA!

Lol no they don’t. Completely unethical.

Compass has many, many private exclusive listings as do most of the larger brokerages. So "lol" at you. There is nothing unethical about it.

All brokerages offer private exclusives. We bought one and got a great deal. There was no sign, but the listing agent told our long time agent about it. We saw it and wrote a full price, cash offer that day. It was an estate sale, and the sellers who had inherited it were not local and didn’t want to do any prep work. Since closing, we’ve had multiple neighbors tell us they didn’t know it was even coming on and would have looked at it or are upset that it sold for a low price. I guess the sellers got the ease they wanted, but they likely left money on the table. I would never list a property as a private exclusive.

Anonymous wrote:
This is all wrong.

Yes, you get fewer potential buyers seeing your home. That's a bad thing, not a good thing.

You do have to stage it, if you want to make a good impression on any buyer and induce them to make an offer. An unattractive interior depresses prices, rather than elevates them, whether one person sees the house or dozens do.

You do need photos if you want to persuade a potential buyer to come see the property in person. That doesn't change because the buyer is represented by another agent within the same brokerage. That agent has to persuade any potential buyer to take a look, and they do that with attractive photos.

You don't "get a quick sale for exactly what you want". The price is determined by the market, which consists of one seller and some number of buyers. The more buyers, the higher the price for the one property. Artificially restricting the number of buyers means less competition and lower pricing. "Exactly what you want" is the highest price possible, and you only get that when you entertain offers from the most potential buyers.

Don't listen to this nonsense.

I am the person you quoted.

If I were a seller, whether there are only a few people who come to look at my house and whether it is a good or bad thing would be completely up to me. I would personally want to limit the number of people who see all my stuff.

In my experience not everyone who does a private listing will stage it. Two private listings I went to yesterday were not staged. Neither of those listings had any photos either. Whether a seller wants to stage it or have professional photos done for a private listing is up to the seller.

And same thing for the price--if a seller has a price in mind and that is exactly what they want even if it is not what the top of the market is willing to pay, then that's what they want and if they will take it, that's that.

I don't think my perspective ought to be put down for being different than PP's perspective, but anyway, bottom line is, OP can do what they want and a private listing has its pros and cons.

Anonymous wrote:I know someone who went this route with Compass, and they're not wealthy at all (it was about a $1 million house). They're not even the types who care about "privacy." The way they described it was -- the house would be shown only to clients of Compass first, and they might get some valuable feedback if it didn't sell before putting it out publicly. They got an offer they were pleased with after the brokers open house for Compass people only, and that was the end of it.

+1. My relative had the same experience in another metro market (Charlotte) about a month or so ago. I think she did it rather than list her house over the holidays and have it get stale, but she got an offer she was more than pleased with after the brokers open house for Compass only and so the house never even went on MLS.

I've seen off-market house that's old, outdated, overpriced, fixer-upper the most, as-is, foundation issues, water damages, renters not moving out till XX months later. Off-market lost its hype soon.

Some sellers want to sell but don't want to make any effort what so ever, and don't mind disturbing their renters.

But maybe this is also why inventory is so low in the market and people 'holding cash on the sidelines waiting for new listings'. Sad for buyers, maybe a win for sellers.

I think the mental block that some people have in understanding private listings is that they are profit-maximizers and think that everyone is like them. I'm a profit-maximizer myself, so I get it. But not everyone is like that. And so they'll have a mental idea of how much they'd like to get for their house, and if they can get that amount after showing it to a smaller universe of people, that's appealing to them, regardless of whether they're potentially leaving money on the table.

We have sold via private listing twice. I don't know why people have such disdain for private listings. It can really simplify the selling process. The first time, we wanted $X for our house and told our realtor. She scheduled a few showings while we were out of town, then brought us a buyer who offered $X. We sold the house As Is - no fix up or prep, no inspections, and 4% total broker fees.

The second time we sold via private listing, we had multiple offers over the listing price. If it's a hot market/limited inventory, you have buyers on the sidelines, with cash, waiting for new listings. Brokers know each other and will reach out to get a jump on a new listing before it goes on MLS.

In either scenario, we could always have moved to MLS if we weren't happy with the private listing outcome, and we'd have intel on our pricing/how the house was showing/ buyer response so that we could position ourselves better for a public listing.

We'll do a private listing for our current house as well, when the time comes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hoping to sell off market. I know that Compass has private exclusive listings and I have talked to an agent about that. Seems like that could be somewhat limiting - as in you'll only see it if you're a buyer working with a Compass agent. Any other brokerages (or agents) that do off market or pre-market very well? Our house is in a highly desirable neighborhood and should sell quickly if we get a decent number of eyes on it. Trying to avoid listing for a couple reasons but will resort to it if needed. TIA!

I went to a couple of these private listings. I think the main advantage is as a seller you limit the number of people going through your home. Also you don’t have to stage it or get professional photos done. You can still get a quick sale too for exactly what you want because this market is crazy after all. We were going to make an offer on one of those private listings yesterday but were beat out by ten minutes by someone who made an offer that was exactly what the sellers wanted and was at the top of our price point.

That said, if there’s any info you can share, I’d personally love to know more/connect with you as I’m obviously in the market for a home 😉

This is all wrong.

Yes, you get fewer potential buyers seeing your home. That's a bad thing, not a good thing.

You do have to stage it, if you want to make a good impression on any buyer and induce them to make an offer. An unattractive interior depresses prices, rather than elevates them, whether one person sees the house or dozens do.

You do need photos if you want to persuade a potential buyer to come see the property in person. That doesn't change because the buyer is represented by another agent within the same brokerage. That agent has to persuade any potential buyer to take a look, and they do that with attractive photos.

You don't "get a quick sale for exactly what you want". The price is determined by the market, which consists of one seller and some number of buyers. The more buyers, the higher the price for the one property. Artificially restricting the number of buyers means less competition and lower pricing. "Exactly what you want" is the highest price possible, and you only get that when you entertain offers from the most potential buyers.

Don't listen to this nonsense.