Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:FWIW, DH and I have been buying and selling residential real estate for 20 years now. Even back then the commission is negotiable. We alway pay 4.5%. 3% goes to the buyer’s agent/agency and 1.5% to my agent to split w his agency. He worked as an independent under a listing agency. He essentially takes b/t 0.5-0.75% per transaction. He doesn’t advertise and has a pretty extensive inventor client list that buys/sells both residential and commercial properties. He makes a great living and we have done well with him through the various up-and-down markets.
I’m curious why you pay double to the buying agent?
We are considering entering an agreement with a realtor for 4.5%- 2 to buyer and 2.5 to seller. This seems fair as the buyers are literally lining up and the selling agent incurs listing fees and staging. What am I missing here? Why does the buyer agent deserve so much more?
Anonymous wrote:Cartel system is broken.
System will find it's floor like many other developed countries where it cost 1-2% total.
Stock brokers used to cahrge useless fees and cartel was broken eventually. About time, americans stop wasting 5% of biggest purchase of their life. Agent can be useful but not as much as 5%.
30-40 bucks an hour is more than enough.
10 hours - 400 bucks
100 hours - 4000 bucks
200 hours - 8000 bucks
Hourly contract just like any other work will do fine.
Anonymous wrote:As someone who is saving up for a condo, I’m not really happy with this decision. Now not only will I have to have money for a downpayment and closing costs, but also agent costs. Sellers probably won’t want to pay buyers agents, and I don’t want to a first time home buyer without one. It seems to shift more burden onto buyers. But it seems like many are happy with this decision.
Anonymous wrote:As someone who is saving up for a condo, I’m not really happy with this decision. Now not only will I have to have money for a downpayment and closing costs, but also agent costs. Sellers probably won’t want to pay buyers agents, and I don’t want to a first time home buyer without one. It seems to shift more burden onto buyers. But it seems like many are happy with this decision.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is good on the selling side. But I'm totally confused about how this would work on the buyer side.
I didn't ask my agent to show me a bunch of houses but she totally kicked it into high gear when we saw that a house that met my criteria was coming on market. Basically, she was totally on point with every step from initial showing to getting my offer to the seller quickly. It was definitely a value-add over what I could have done myself. Her motivation? She knew she stood to make bank if we got my (strong) offer to the seller first. Was what she did worth almost a quarter grand to the seller? - No, the seller was going to accept the first solid offer that came in, and there would have been others if not mine. So it makes sense that I as the buyer pay, but how much was that really worth? Not almost a quarter grand, I don't think so especially if I'm paying, but at the same time I do think that there probably needs to be some potential upside for the agent beyond the sum total of the hours spent.
You are paying agent fees as a buyer, don’t you see that?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If I am reading correctly, this new system will become effective July. Would some people intending to put their house on the market choose to wait until July to do it? If so, inventory could fall even further, and prices climb more in the next few months.
If anyone lists their home in the next few months, I’d expect it to say “no buyer agent commission will be paid” in big letters in the listing.
Exactly what will happen and there will be no co-op commission shown in the MLS.
So sellers get all the benefit of having representation and buyers get none? Cue the lawsuits in a few years from buyers who are like lambs to the slaughter having to use the sellers agent because they can't afford to pay for representation. T The sellers agent LEGALLY REPRESENTS the SELLER so the buyer claims their interests weren't protected - which they weren't, because - the sellers agent represents the SELLER! Duh. Buyers will have to settle for greedy listing agents who will work both sides of the deal (this shouldn't even be legal - it's not in Maryland). THERE IS A REASON BUYER AGENT COMPENSATION WAS INTRODUCED IN THE 90's pushed for by consumer advocacy groups that recognize buyers were at an unfair position. So the upshot of this will be that wealthy buyers will be okay, the average person and lower income buyers are going to be screwed.
We shall see what all the unintended fall out for this is. Some prices will come down rather than go up. Who do you think is bringing all these buyers to homes?? And yes, some crappy agents will start opening doors for a per door fee, but you get what you pay for. Many buyers will not be able to pay for a seasoned agent who understands the contract and can protect the buyers interest AND afford a higher price for a home. So the frenzy that drives the price so high because there are 20 offers on a home will subside because there will not be as many offers. And what about VA buyers who are expressly not allowed to pay for representation??? Again, thrown to the wolves of having to use the SELLERS agent. Yes, we are in a hot sellers market now, but all these sellers who think they don't need buyers agents to show their homes and guide buyers through making offers will be crying when the market shifts some day.
This is a stupid decision that will hurt everyone in the end.
Anonymous wrote:This is good on the selling side. But I'm totally confused about how this would work on the buyer side.
I didn't ask my agent to show me a bunch of houses but she totally kicked it into high gear when we saw that a house that met my criteria was coming on market. Basically, she was totally on point with every step from initial showing to getting my offer to the seller quickly. It was definitely a value-add over what I could have done myself. Her motivation? She knew she stood to make bank if we got my (strong) offer to the seller first. Was what she did worth almost a quarter grand to the seller? - No, the seller was going to accept the first solid offer that came in, and there would have been others if not mine. So it makes sense that I as the buyer pay, but how much was that really worth? Not almost a quarter grand, I don't think so especially if I'm paying, but at the same time I do think that there probably needs to be some potential upside for the agent beyond the sum total of the hours spent.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:well, everywhere else in the world or developed countries, the commission is not more than 2% so not sure why we pay so high. Another reason housing is so crazy high
This is DUMB. First of all, everywhere else where the commission is lower (Europe for example) agents also have a base salary and HEALTH CARE.
Housing being "so crazy high" has NOTHING to do with agent commissions and you are an idiot if you believe this.