[CoachKandSportsguy]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I hasn't been that way when I have signed a listing contract. I have always used option C.

correct, it hasn't been that way because now the FTC rules have changed. .

You can pay 0 to the buyers agent, your choice, the result may be that you are limiting your pool of buyers to a much smaller subset, which means your buyer pool is

Either is not using a buyer's agent, so could care less about buyer's commission
or
Is using a buyer's agent AND can pay for the buyer's commission in addition to the house sale.

You will be excluding buyers with agents who can't afford to pay the buyer's agent separately.

Of course you can do whatever you want, you just might have consequences you don't want, such as waiting much longer for a buyer who meets your qualifications. .

Other questions are,
will the buyer put into the offer letter that the seller must pay the buyer's agent or the offer is null and void?

If so, then you may have a lot of failed bids when one tries to sell.

Will you the buyer accept a higher offer with the excess over listing returned to the seller as the buyer's commission at closing?

Will the bank accept that higher price and those terms for financing by the buyer?

again, the market will be sh!t show until everyone figures out a standardized way of managing a real estate transaction, including banks and buyers. . Its a change, humans resist change or make a mess of it, one way or another

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by CoachKandSportsguy

correct, it hasn't been that way because now the FTC rules have changed. .

You can pay 0 to the buyers agent, your choice, the result may be that you are limiting your pool of buyers to a much smaller subset, which means your buyer pool is

Either is not using a buyer's agent, so could care less about buyer's commission
or
Is using a buyer's agent AND can pay for the buyer's commission in addition to the house sale.

You will be excluding buyers with agents who can't afford to pay the buyer's agent separately.

Of course you can do whatever you want, you just might have consequences you don't want, such as waiting much longer for a buyer who meets your qualifications. .

Other questions are,
will the buyer put into the offer letter that the seller must pay the buyer's agent or the offer is null and void?

If so, then you may have a lot of failed bids when one tries to sell.

Will you the buyer accept a higher offer with the excess over listing returned to the seller as the buyer's commission at closing?

Will the bank accept that higher price and those terms for financing by the buyer?

again, the market will be sh!t show until everyone figures out a standardized way of managing a real estate transaction, including banks and buyers. . Its a change, humans resist change or make a mess of it, one way or another

My only reason to pay a seller's commission is to pay for an experienced agent's sales, marketing, and negotiating skills. If potential buyers have their own agent, and expect me to pay them, I don't need an agent. I would rather list the house as a FSBO and offer a 3 percent finder's fee to whoever brings me a buyer.

[Sweatman]

Say I walk into an open house and I’m not signed with a buyers agent, make an offer representing myself… is the only commission due on the (accepted) offer paid by the seller based on their agreement with their listing agent?

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

My only reason to pay a seller's commission is to pay for an experienced agent's sales, marketing, and negotiating skills. If potential buyers have their own agent, and expect me to pay them, I don't need an agent. I would rather list the house as a FSBO and offer a 3 percent finder's fee to whoever brings me a buyer.

So which are you going to choose? I get the logic, but you have to make a decision when selling the house, so which will it be?

a) paying a selling / listing agent
b) paying a buyer's agent and you will do the listing and the marketing?

since you gave an either or scenario, which are you going to choose?

[Robnlaura]

Originally Posted by Plinker

On August 17th a new real estate law will go into effect which will no longer allow realtors hired by the home seller to list the commission the seller will pay to the buyers realtor. In short, the seller will negotiate the commission with their realtor and the buyer will negotiate their end of the commission with the buyer’s realtor. Seller and buyer pay their own fees. The savings could be huge.
Instead of the seller paying a 5-6% commission to be split between seller and buyer agent, the seller could negotiate a 2 1/2 - 3% commission with their realtor. On a $500,000 home the seller would pay $25,000 - $30,000 under the old law and “only” $12,500 - $15,000 under the new law. Double this for a $1,000,000 listing, etc.
I spoke with a Village Realtor concerning pre owned homes and was told they are maintaining the 5-6 % commissions.
Will this cause Villagers to choose MLS if selling their home? Will FSBO sellers now be more willing to hire a realtor? How do you think this will play out?

Realtors need to make money. I don’t know any realtor that would help anyone for nothing. I think it’s going to be a massive disaster.. my thinking is you will see Zillow getting involved like it’s always been the goal they had. They sold leads to agents for a huge amount of money.. how do they replace that money.. hire a bunch of realtors for a fee. sign you up as client on a contract. And voila they own it all and you will pay..

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by CoachKandSportsguy

So which are you going to choose? I get the logic, but you have to make a decision when selling the house, so which will it be?

a) paying a selling / listing agent
b) paying a buyer's agent and you will do the listing and the marketing?

since you gave an either or scenario, which are you going to choose?

I would prefer to pay a seller/listing agent to represent me only because I think they are better qualified to market a house than I am. But, if they force me to pay a buyer's agent commission, I will do a FSBO.

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I would prefer to pay a seller/listing agent to represent me only because I think they are better qualified to market a house than I am. But, if they force me to pay a buyer's agent commission, I will do a FSBO.

I agree with the selling agent.
Not sure how I will handle the buyer's agent fees, since here in MA lawyers do most of the buyer's work.. . . which is my I am reading my socials for specific news from reality is stranger than fiction. .

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Originally Posted by Sweatman

Say I walk into an open house and I’m not signed with a buyers agent, make an offer representing myself… is the only commission due on the (accepted) offer paid by the seller based on their agreement with their listing agent?

expected to be yes. . .

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by CoachKandSportsguy

I agree with the selling agent.
Not sure how I will handle the buyer's agent fees, since here in MA lawyers do most of the buyer's work.. . . which is my I am reading my socials for specific news from reality is stranger than fiction. .

As I understand it, the buyer's and seller's agents don't get paid to do anything but to negotiate and execute a sales contract. Everything after that is the responsibility of the title company. They have lawyers on staff to make sure the title is clean and is transferred legally. When you sell a house as a FSBO, the title company will provide a FSBO package that has all of the forms needed to execute a sales contract, and they will take over from there.

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

As I understand it, the buyer's and seller's agents don't get paid to do anything but to negotiate and execute a sales contract. Everything after that is the responsibility of the title company. They have lawyers on staff to make sure the title is clean and is transferred legally. When you sell a house as a FSBO, the title company will provide a FSBO package that has all of the forms needed to execute a sales contract, and they will take over from there.

Here in MA, we don't have title companies, we have lawyers and titles.
which is why I gave my MA scenario, and have spoken with lawyers about the sale.

The seller's agent lists and markets the house.
The buyer and selling lawyers execute the deal.
The buyer provides the funding checks, the lawyers handle the money to go where the agreement states. .

Which is why I am watching to see how to structure the sale with the listing agent and how to handle any MA buyer's agents. . just not sure how it will change the process quite yet, but it will change it.

[Plinker]

Originally Posted by Sweatman

Say I walk into an open house and I’m not signed with a buyers agent, make an offer representing myself… is the only commission due on the (accepted) offer paid by the seller based on their agreement with their listing agent?

Yes. Prior to the FTC ruling, a seller agreed to a percentage of the sales price of the home due their agent (brokerage) upon closing. What many people don’t realize is that the seller’s agent had a side deal with the buyer agent, if a buyer was working with a realtor. The seller doesn’t see this arrangement on the documents they sign for representation. However, the MLS has a form that only the realtors have access to which discloses what the selling agent will pay the buyer’s agent if they bring a buyer and close the deal. We, as sellers, never see this.
Example: 5% commission on $600,000 home. Seller’s agent/brokerage receives $30,000 from seller at closing. The deal the seller’s agent made with the buyers agent may be 50% (could be less) of the $30,000 commission that the SELLER paid. So, yes, the seller paid both commissions. They just don’t realize it. This ruling is designed to prevent this such that each party pays their own agent’s fees.
If the buyer doesn’t engage the services of a realtor then the seller’s agent pockets the full fee. So, instead of agreeing to 5-6% you can now offer 2 1/2 - 3% to the listing agent and let the buyer decide if they want representation.
A previous post was spot-on. A buyer may ask a seller to pay their buyer fees but the seller can decline which may decrease the pool of offers.

[C. C. Rider]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I would prefer to pay a seller/listing agent to represent me only because I think they are better qualified to market a house than I am. But, if they force me to pay a buyer's agent commission, I will do a FSBO.

If you do a FSBO, then you'll have to handle both the buying and the selling agents' jobs by yourself. You'll have to do your own advertising, handle all phone calls, scheduling of appointments, showing the house, dealing/negotiating with any possible interested parties, arranging for a lawyer to write up the deal if you are successful in your negotiations, help the uninformed buyer find/locate financing, arrange for all the inspections, negotiate again with the buyer if any problems crop up, and hopefully jump through all these hoops successfully in order to arrive at a closing date.

Meanwhile, you'll need to be a salesman and negotiator to soothe the buyer's nerves if/when problems/situations come up regarding the inspections, the contract, or the financing involved. It's not rocket science, but if you haven't done this type of stuff before, you'll likely be pulling your hair out and begging for help from someone long before you get to the closing.

[Robnlaura]

Originally Posted by C. C. Rider

If you do a FSBO, then you'll have to handle both the buying and the selling agents' jobs by yourself. You'll have to do your own advertising, handle all phone calls, scheduling of appointments, showing the house, dealing/negotiating with any possible interested parties, arranging for a lawyer to write up the deal if you are successful in your negotiations, help the uninformed buyer find/locate financing, arrange for all the inspections, negotiate again with the buyer if any problems crop up, and hopefully jump through all these hoops successfully in order to arrive at a closing date.

Meanwhile, you'll need to be a salesman and negotiator to soothe the buyer's nerves if/when problems/situations come up regarding the inspections, the contract, or the financing involved. It's not rocket science, but if you haven't done this type of stuff before, you'll likely be pulling your hair out and begging for help from someone long before you get to the closing.

No pay? Let them do it themselves. Problem solved

[Shelbyh]

Originally Posted by Plinker

On August 17th a new real estate law will go into effect which will no longer allow realtors hired by the home seller to list the commission the seller will pay to the buyers realtor. In short, the seller will negotiate the commission with their realtor and the buyer will negotiate their end of the commission with the buyer’s realtor. Seller and buyer pay their own fees. The savings could be huge.
Instead of the seller paying a 5-6% commission to be split between seller and buyer agent, the seller could negotiate a 2 1/2 - 3% commission with their realtor. On a $500,000 home the seller would pay $25,000 - $30,000 under the old law and “only” $12,500 - $15,000 under the new law. Double this for a $1,000,000 listing, etc.
I spoke with a Village Realtor concerning pre owned homes and was told they are maintaining the 5-6 % commissions.
Will this cause Villagers to choose MLS if selling their home? Will FSBO sellers now be more willing to hire a realtor? How do you think this will play out?

This new regulation is going to be a nightmare. You forgot to mention that before you can even view a home you are interested in you need to sign an agreement to pay a certain commission to the agents, I am not comfortable signing anything unless I am making an actual offer. Think about how many homes someone looks at before buying.
I see this turning bad for realtors and people go back to for sale by owner.
Buyer’s will need to agree to pay an agent for their time for showing a home even if you don’t buy one.
This is what I gathered from listening to realtors YouTube from here in TV.

[MandoMan]

Originally Posted by Plinker

On August 17th a new real estate law will go into effect which will no longer allow realtors hired by the home seller to list the commission the seller will pay to the buyers realtor. In short, the seller will negotiate the commission with their realtor and the buyer will negotiate their end of the commission with the buyer’s realtor. Seller and buyer pay their own fees. The savings could be huge.
Instead of the seller paying a 5-6% commission to be split between seller and buyer agent, the seller could negotiate a 2 1/2 - 3% commission with their realtor. On a $500,000 home the seller would pay $25,000 - $30,000 under the old law and “only” $12,500 - $15,000 under the new law. Double this for a $1,000,000 listing, etc.
I spoke with a Village Realtor concerning pre owned homes and was told they are maintaining the 5-6 % commissions.
Will this cause Villagers to choose MLS if selling their home? Will FSBO sellers now be more willing to hire a realtor? How do you think this will play out?

This cuts in half the commission the seller pays, as the buyer’s agent no longer splits the commission with the seller’s agent 50/50. Great! That saves you a bundle when you sell. But if you then BUY a house, you now have to pay 3% to the buyer’s agent, whereas before the seller paid. So if you both buy and sell, you come out the same. Of course, if you have to pay for that additional 3% by taking out a larger mortgage, you pay off that amount by mortgage for many years.