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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Things aren’t going to change very much.

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.

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

Things aren’t going to change very much.

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%

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

Things aren’t going to change very much.