[retiredguy123]

I am amazed that some people think that the seller's commission is just a "tacked on" fee to the sale of a house. When I sell a house, I expect the listing agent to earn that commission in the form of a higher price for the house. That is why I never agree to pay a commission to a buyer's agent. They are not working for me to maximize the price. If I thought the commission was just an add-on fee, I would never sign a listing contract. To me, a buyer's agent is worthless.

[justjim]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

You're suggesting the USPS doesn't operate like a well-oiled machine, because of government involvement?

Who would believe that? Government is the solution, not the problem ... everyone knows that!

The USPS has tried for years to make changes to get efficient. For example, wanting to close some rural post offices by consolidation, etc. etc. Their budget is controlled by Congress. Need I say more.

There is an ol’ saying in the world of sales. “Nothing really ever happens until somebody sells something”. When you think about it, there is really a lot of truth in that.

[LeRoySmith]

Originally Posted by Normal

Yes, I don’t see a reason to pay for seller realtors and their suits, lunches and nice cars. That’s all dressing on a pig, a pig that needs to die away.

Amen.

It cost me $750 to get a 600k house listed on MLS in Dallas. Sold in a week with no additional fees.

[Plinker]

Originally Posted by candacev

Quick answer: Seller is paying listing brokerage x%. Regardless of whether the buyer was procured by listing brokerage or another brokerage they are still paying that x%. Seller has the choice of whether or not they agree to let listing broker split that x% or not. It is in their best interest to do so in my opinion. If they are not willing to, then their house is just going to sell for less because whatever the buyer offers is going to take into consideration what they may have to pay the agent that they are working with. Therefore the split % is still coming from the seller

My point is this. If I hired you to sell my home, the contract would pay you a 5% commission if and only if the buyer had a buyer’s agent. However, if no buyer’s agent is involved in the transaction then your commission drops to 2.5%.
You end up with the same amount of money as if a split-commission was involved. Such a contract would not limit the pool of buyers. Problem solved! This is how to prevent double dipping of commissions.
Would you agree to such a contract if I listed my home with you?

[Boomer]

What a mess this will be.

If I am reading things right, there will not be standard contract language for buyers to sign, meaning that there can be many different versions of what a buyer is signing on to pay — and for how long the commitment to that agent will be.

A lot of dust needs to settle on this. Buyers better be extremely careful what they sign. Looks to me like you could end up “married” to an agent you just met in the driveway, signed, and then find out you do not like or trust that agent.

I admit I am not actually clear on any of this. All I really know is if you are buying and/or selling at this time, you better educate yourself on what all this means and be very, very careful before signing anything.

Boomer

[justjim]

Originally Posted by kingofbeer

As a buyer, I will deal directly with the seller's agent --- the seller's agent will need to take 3% or less.

Good luck with that especially negotiating with the Villages Developer who is the only seller of new houses.

MLS Realtors all have a bottom line when it comes to their commission too. For Sale by Owner you can negotiate the price but the “closing Agent”, the lawyer if you get one, and certainly the government tax stamps etc. are set fees and good luck negotiating those.

[MightyDog]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I am amazed that some people think that the seller's commission is just a "tacked on" fee to the sale of a house. When I sell a house, I expect the listing agent to earn that commission in the form of a higher price for the house. That is why I never agree to pay a commission to a buyer's agent. They are not working for me to maximize the price. If I thought the commission was just an add-on fee, I would never sign a listing contract. To me, a buyer's agent is worthless.

The basic reality involves simple probability. A selling/listing agent only has so many (maybe none) clients interested in looking at a new property they listed. But, there is a vast pool of potential buyers who are using their own agent to help them find a home. That is mostly where your buyer potential comes from.

If a seller stipulated to their listing agent that they want to pay $0 fee to a buyers agent, then, except for a low supply/high demand market, their supply of interested buyers would shrink to almost none. That's just reality and has been for a long time.

The seller could wait for someone like me who doesn't use buy-side agents but, that could take a long time and the listing will go stale and get looked-past (yes, that's a real thing and generally involves price reductions to become relevant again).

I am closing on my place in the Midwest this Wed. It's a high demand area so, I listed myself on Zillow and am a marketing pro so, it was a good listing. Stated I'd deal directly or pay a buyers agent. Got an offer from buyer using an agent within a week and will be paying the agent 1.5%. (Low because this is a clean, easy deal with little time involved for the agent.) Frankly, it saved me some headaches from handling all of that in addition to the enormous amount of work in a big move like this.

If I felt like waiting awhile, I would have a gotten a buyer on their own but, this guy who's buying really wanted it and is paying the highest price I think this property could attain currently. So, it all worked out for me.

[Normal]

Originally Posted by MightyDog

The basic reality involves simple probability. A selling/listing agent only has so many (maybe none) clients interested in looking at a new property they listed. But, there is a vast pool of potential buyers who are using their own agent to help them find a home. That is mostly where your buyer potential comes from.

If a seller stipulated to their listing agent that they want to pay $0 fee to a buyers agent, then, except for a low supply/high demand market, their supply of interested buyers would shrink to almost none. That's just reality and has been for a long time.

The seller could wait for someone like me who doesn't use buy-side agents but, that could take a long time and the listing will go stale and get looked-past (yes, that's a real thing and generally involves price reductions to become relevant again).

I am closing on my place in the Midwest this Wed. It's a high demand area so, I listed myself on Zillow and am a marketing pro so, it was a good listing. Stated I'd deal directly or pay a buyers agent. Got an offer from buyer using an agent within a week and will be paying the agent 1.5%. (Low because this is a clean, easy deal with little time involved for the agent.) Frankly, it saved me some headaches from handling all of that in addition to the enormous amount of work in a big move like this.

If I felt like waiting awhile, I would have a gotten a buyer on their own but, this guy who's buying really wanted it and is paying the highest price I think this property could attain currently. So, it all worked out for me.

Zillow is the virtual real estate vehicle. The latest stats show 75% of all buyers go to Zillow.

[MightyDog]

Originally Posted by Normal

Zillow is the virtual real estate vehicle. The latest stats show 75% of all buyers go to Zillow.

That doesn't mean they don't use a buyers agent.

It may mean that they LOOK and source possible properties on Zillow, Trulia, Realtor dot com and elsewhere. But then, still use an agent to help them thru the process.

I know few people who have the confidence to do it on their own. They just haven't transacted many properties so, haven't built enough of a knowledge base and they also look at it like --- well, the seller pays the agents, so why wouldn't I use one?

[LeRoySmith]

Originally Posted by Normal

Zillow is the virtual real estate vehicle. The latest stats show 75% of all buyers go to Zillow.

I suspect this change in real estate is similar to what happened to travel agents when the internet started to make their job less necessary.