Thank you for your video. It’s very refreshing!! Some of these agents want to make consumers think that dual agency is the worst thing in the world. I’ve done it twice and looking forward to go that route again. I chose to go that route in the first place because I’ve dealt with the worst buyers agent ever.
Forty two states allow for a duel agency. In the past a listing agent working with a buyer did not have to have a buyer's contract with the buyer. Their commission for making the sale and bringing the buyer was already included in the listing agreement. Now the listing agent will have a listing agreement with the seller and when they work with a buyer, they will have to have a buyer's agreement with the buyer. What does that mean? If the listing agent wants to represent the best interest of the buyer, he would want to negotiate the seller to pay the buyer's commission. But as the listing agent, he is required to represent the best interests of the seller.
The market determines the home prices and it's the NET PROCEEDS that determine the sales price, not the gross sales price. The principles of supply and demand will certainly reduce prices. Sellers care about net proceeds, not gross sales price. If they can get the same net proceeds at a lower price, they will. Competition is what sets prices.
I disagree. The Net proceeds is mostly dependant on what the owner currently owes on the property. You can have two $1 million houses, one has a $900k mortgage and another has no mortgage. Should one sell for more than the other because of what loans are currently on the deed? Thanks for watching!
@@JayCosta I think you have missed my point. The debts owed on the property don't matter. As an example, let's say you have a $1,000,000 property for sale today. If commissions are 6%, the net is $940,000, less all other expenses including any debts. If the commission falls to 3%, then the seller can sell the house for $970,000 and still net the same $940,000, less the other expenses. The lower commissions will result in lower prices, giving the same net to the seller. Yes, sellers will try to sell for as much as they can, but the principles of supply and demand will be in play. Sellers still need to compete with other sellers. This is basic economics 101. Of course, many other factors will be in play, so this is based on all other things being equal.
@@JayCosta The reality of real estate sales is that the buyer is the one paying the commissions now. The buyer is the one writing the check for the full price, whether it's all cash or with a loan. The commissions are included in that full price. If the commissions weren't there at all, sellers could sell the home for 6% less and still net the same proceeds. Net proceeds are all that sellers care about.
Thank you for your video. It’s very refreshing!! Some of these agents want to make consumers think that dual agency is the worst thing in the world. I’ve done it twice and looking forward to go that route again. I chose to go that route in the first place because I’ve dealt with the worst buyers agent ever.
Some are very hard workers, for sure. But most are terrible. Thanks for watching!
Forty two states allow for a duel agency. In the past a listing agent working with a buyer did not have to have a buyer's contract with the buyer. Their commission for making the sale and bringing the buyer was already included in the listing agreement.
Now the listing agent will have a listing agreement with the seller and when they work with a buyer, they will have to have a buyer's agreement with the buyer. What does that mean? If the listing agent wants to represent the best interest of the buyer, he would want to negotiate the seller to pay the buyer's commission. But as the listing agent, he is required to represent the best interests of the seller.
So maybe this means the end of dual agency?
@@JayCostaThat would take state legislators to make that change.
The market determines the home prices and it's the NET PROCEEDS that determine the sales price, not the gross sales price. The principles of supply and demand will certainly reduce prices. Sellers care about net proceeds, not gross sales price. If they can get the same net proceeds at a lower price, they will. Competition is what sets prices.
I disagree. The Net proceeds is mostly dependant on what the owner currently owes on the property. You can have two $1 million houses, one has a $900k mortgage and another has no mortgage. Should one sell for more than the other because of what loans are currently on the deed? Thanks for watching!
@@JayCosta I think you have missed my point. The debts owed on the property don't matter. As an example, let's say you have a $1,000,000 property for sale today. If commissions are 6%, the net is $940,000, less all other expenses including any debts. If the commission falls to 3%, then the seller can sell the house for $970,000 and still net the same $940,000, less the other expenses. The lower commissions will result in lower prices, giving the same net to the seller. Yes, sellers will try to sell for as much as they can, but the principles of supply and demand will be in play. Sellers still need to compete with other sellers. This is basic economics 101. Of course, many other factors will be in play, so this is based on all other things being equal.
@@JayCosta The reality of real estate sales is that the buyer is the one paying the commissions now. The buyer is the one writing the check for the full price, whether it's all cash or with a loan. The commissions are included in that full price. If the commissions weren't there at all, sellers could sell the home for 6% less and still net the same proceeds. Net proceeds are all that sellers care about.
50% of real estate agents have either sold 0-1 houses in a year
Yup, I think this will get rid of most of those agents. Thanks for watching!