100% Disagree We just sold one of our listings with an undefined and without a predetermined offer of compensation And guess what happened - we still had multiple offers - the home still went over asking and - the seller paid the commission that the buyer’s agent requested - In CA we have had the ability to ask the seller to pay for the buyers commission since Dec 22
Tell social media thanks..... They killed the real estate game... You got people flashing too much..... The feds went right for y'all commissions( Jealousy).... Tell real estate agents to stay off social media and quit bragging... Work quietly and make a lots of money.
BTW - steering was only one of the reason the DOJ filed it letter of interest - the other is they don’t want the sellers predetermine the commission that the buyer’s agent is getting paid - they want that to be exclusively set by an agreement between the buyer and their agent - the DOJ is totally fine if the sellers want to pay it on behalf of the buyers they just don’t want it set by the sellers And with I predict that the DOJ will also file a letter of interest with the court on the NAR Settlement too - because it only limits the removal of the offer of compensation in the MLS and I am betting that the DOJ will state in their letter that that doesn’t go far enough - just my opinion of how I see it playing out
As a seller and buyer in the past, the agents are getting paid too much for their services. I am not saying agents get paid nothing, but home prices are easily over 500k, paying 30k of that to agents are such a waste from the sellers perspective. I am still paying for home inspections, title insurances, financing, and many other fees.
Yes the commission are super high compared to everywhere else in the world. But agents do have high costs like paying huge court judgements when caught and donations to local, county, state and Federal politicians to keep those fat checks legal. Not cheap. There certainly isn't any requirement to pay a listing agent 3%. Discount brokers have been around for many years thanks to court judgements against brokers in the past that forced them from demanding agents all charge 3%. But owners have generally remained dumb and pay. Silly really. The buyer's commission you should be happy to pay for 2 basic reasons. #1 The buyer pays the commission yet the agent has convinced the buyer you're paying. It's a sweet scam. Follow the money. The buyer is the only one putting money in. Or say you get 2 offers. One for $500k with a 3% commission and another for $490k and no commission? Well the lower offer of course. Duh. Wait, what? You care about your net, not "the offer price". The offer price is a pointless scam to get dumb sellers to give money away. With 2 offers, one no commission means the buy towing an agent has to pony up a offer price at least 3% higher. They pay the commission. #2 The buyer's agent works for you the seller. They've worked the buyer over and have scammed them into thinking they represent them, but really work for the seller. If the buyer loves your house and you play hardball on price you know exactly what that agent is going to be saying to the buyer "you don't want to lose your dream house", "the market is tight right now and this type of house may not come up again", "prices are going up fast so losing this house could cost you even more next month", etc... That's their job. Get that buyer to close on any house no matter what to collect that commission. They don't care which seller as long as the commission is the same. Do you want the buyer's agent on your side as the seller or steering buyers away?
The DOJ has indicated they wanted more transparency, so by NAR offering to remove the co-op from MLS, it does just the opposite. I'm thinking this will create a lot of variation when these changes are executed locally, which in turn will create consumer confusion. 😟
Let me guess, you're an agent. Currently agents tell buyers the seller pays their commission. Yippie, FREE rides in a nice car!! Pretty easy sell. But the buyer actually does pay. Now in theory buyer agents will have to tell buyers the truth "I want $15,000 to drive you around if you buy a $500k house." That's transparent and is going to be a little harder to sell. I assume agents will just create other lies like "I'll get the seller to pay my commission" and then steer the buyer away from sellers not playing the game. No doubt it will work, but still harder. And there could be a few more buyers that pause and think about it and decide maybe they'll trying buying on their own and get $15,000 back at close instead. Agents, brokers have always been masters at pulling these scams on sellers and buyers. They've overcome past lawsuits trying to force some honesty. They've pushed millions of $$$ at local, county, state and Federal lawmakers to keep their scams legal. I have no doubt they will again with this. But it's another chip at their scam. A bit more sunshine. Someday, maybe, it will become an actual marketplace. Pie in the sky maybe. But possible. It will change something.
From NAR. Implications for members: There will continue to be many ways in which buyer brokers could be compensated, including through offers of compensation communicated off MLS as we have long believed that it is in the interests of the sellers, buyers, and their brokers to make offers of compensation- but using the MLS to communicate offers of compensation would no longer be an option. The types of compensation available for buyer brokers would continue to take multiple forms, depending on broker-consumer negotiations, including BUT NOT LIMITED TO: Fixed-fee commission paid directly by consumers.☝️ Concession from the seller.☝️ Portion of the listing broker's compensation.☝️ Compensation would continue to be negotiable and should always be negotiated between agents and the consumers they serve. That sounds pretty much like business as usual to me🤔
That's hilarious you don't read your own listing contract. If you can read look for the bit that says something like "Broker is authorized to cooperate with and compensate..." blah, blah, blah 2.5% or 3%. If you can't read ask your broker. And agents wonder why people think they're over paid.
Will be interesting to see how this plays out in the marketplace. Agree....Buyer Agents will have to submit a commission request within the offer to purchase. Buyer may need to kick in some cash, if seller or listing agent don't agree to pay the commission buyers agent wants.
When I list (FSBO or cheap listing) I always offer to pay all closing costs and the buyer or buyer agent 3%. I can do that because as a seller I never pay those, but buyers are told I do. So wow, I'm handing the buyer like $20k!!! Cool!! Buyers love it. And they don't have to haggle either over closing costs. As a seller I only care about my net. I don't give a rat's butt whether that 3% goes to an agent or back to the buyer. No agent, the buyer deposits the full price into escrow and then gets 3% back. What do I care. If a buyer wants to pay themselves or an agent 10%, 20%, don't care. The price just needs to cover it. Investors love it too because they know they don't have to walk me thru the numbers. They already know the buyer pays everything. Plus because I don't use a listing agent I can drop the price nearly 3% and still get my price. Huge advantage. I see many FSBO complain in their listing about paying a buyer agent or just 1%, 2%, 2.5%. Dumb as dirt. They're not paying it. Agents have gone to all this work to set up this scam on buyers and these morons aren't playing a long. Dumb.
In our local market, the notion of steering clients to properties that pay a higher commission is laughable. When the market crashed 2007/2008ish we went from about 80 Active listings on any given day to 800+ Active listings. As of this morning, there were 52 total Active listings, and that number has been below 100 for the past year or two (spiked up to about 175 during Covid). So in our local market, steering wouldn’t even be an option if one was so inclined. For any given buyer there may be only 1 property (or commonly, 0 properties) that meet a buyer’s general requirements.
As a Realtor and a son to a owner of a Brokerage for over 20 years. This isnt going to change much at all, went through the NAR e-mail and settlement procedures and its not going to change much at all. Commission is still negotiable and Agents wont work with people who are going to pay a lower commission.
It can increase buyer pull through - commitment - because they know your deal upfront. I like it. As long as they don’t cap *** or cause pointless hurdles in compliance *** I like it.
That seems correct to me. Just keep steering buyers away from sellers not paying your demanded fee. I mean sure we tell buyers we represent their interests, will get them the right house for them and blah, blah, blah. But come on, we need to eat so F them. The only issue is maybe a few buyers aren't total morons and will start to ask questions if we have to get them to sign a contract that we get our 3% taste no matter if the seller agrees or not. But screw it, they haven't caught on so far, so no reason to think they'll start thinking now.
@MrWaterbugdesign I'm going to find somebody that's going to take my 1 or 2 percent... We know you guys got to eat.... So it's going to be Agents out there that's gonna take it
Problem, reaction, solution. Time will who and how will the solution be implemented. But one thing is for sure, according to the WEF, "in thw future you will own nothing and you'll be happy about it"
Such a BS. First things first, the buyer pays for everything - seller and both agents. Period. Irrespective of buyers affordability, both agents are motivated to close a deal - to pocket their commission. This is good for the seller who is sitting on so much equity in this frenzy of a market. The buyers have been pushed to a point where they prefer renting over buying more now than ever before. You dug your own grave. 😂😂🎉🎉🎉
In my case I found the house and I decided the bid. Except for the paper work he did nothing and made 20k for what? People say it’s the seller who loses money but he doesn’t accept a bid that doesn’t include the commission fees
The business model of commission pay can be deceiving when one plays out as you experienced. Realtors work A LOT for FREE until we close on a house. Sometimes it's 30 before a client buys. NO lie. Sometimes that person who we showed 30+ never buys. And, then there are those that require countless hours, and we may end up with less than minimum wage. Then, once in a rare blue moon, one comes along like your example, and helps to make all of the stress and long hours, and continuing education, lic fees, etc all make financial sense. What a blessing to that agent, because I can promise you, those are a rare occurrence.
You should earn your pay like most people. There are 1,554,604 agents. Most are worthless, yet get paid the same. If you're a good agent buyers will gladly pay you. If you're the standard crap agent it's going to get tougher. Good agents will have more buyers and see their income increase a lot as crap agents starve. Good agents will start using more tools, automation to handle more buyers. With that they will be able to drop their fees even further, get more buyers and earn even more. Most likely the dual agency scam will likely disappear as agents realize it's better to market themselves strictly as being a seller's agent or strictly as a buyer's agent. This is how most businesses operate. I know, scary having to actually compete. Hot looks and a sweet ride won't be the best tools you have any more.
As an investor I will list and expect the co op agent to ask for commission on the contract. That way the buyer will see it plainly. If I negotiate the contract and lower the agent co op the buyer will see that too. If the agent tries to steer the buyer then I have documented legal grounds to sue that broker.
You don't sound like any investor I've ever met. All investors I've met know full well the buyer pays the buyer's commission. What's the point of negotiating down the commission? That's dumb as dirt. The buyer's agent works for the seller. I'm thrilled to pay a buyer agent 3% because I can get 4%, 5% even 10% more in price because I have the agent telling the buyer "it's still a good deal", "you want to get it before someone else starts bidding", "you said it was your dream house" and whatever con they have to run to get that house to close and $$$ in their pocket. Negotiate the commission down??DING, ? You're nuts. Agent will walk. They tied up that buyer and they're not going to sell that buyer for less than 3%. At least that's how it's been. Same when buying a listed property. I call the listing agent, tell them I'm an investor and have no agent. Their minds go ding, ding, winner, winner, chicken dinner...DOUBLE COMMISSION!!! And that I'd interested in them finding me more similar properties. DING, DING, DING!!! Now they're working for me, telling me everything they know about the seller. Bottom price, condition issues seller is worried about, their financial state, what they had for lunch, etc... When I present a low offer that agent will push it 9 out of 10 times. Seller trusts the agent because they're representing them after all. I mean, they did say that, right? Buyers always pay both commissions. No buyer, no sale, no commission. Agents may rationalize these scams to feel better about it. But that sure doesn't stop it.
@@MrWaterbugdesign A- buyers don’t pay the “buyers commission” in my part of the nation. Buyers agents expect the seller to offer a 3% co op. All sales commissions come from the sellers proceeds. B if the buyers agent tries to back out of a deal over their reduced commissions that’s perfect grounds to sue, under the same grounds this lawsuit was won on. And I would have documentation from the contract. So please steer buyers from listing after they have offered a contract, I welcome the lawsuit and the potential millions from their broker. These two very simple points tell me you are actually the one without the experience to be commenting.
Thanks for your insight. This will completely change how we do business and could lead to a lot of buyers being taken advantage of.
100% Disagree
We just sold one of our listings with an undefined and without a predetermined offer of compensation
And guess what happened
- we still had multiple offers
- the home still went over asking
and
- the seller paid the commission that the buyer’s agent requested
- In CA we have had the ability to ask the seller to pay for the buyers commission since Dec 22
Tell social media thanks..... They killed the real estate game... You got people flashing too much..... The feds went right for y'all commissions( Jealousy).... Tell real estate agents to stay off social media and quit bragging... Work quietly and make a lots of money.
BTW - steering was only one of the reason the DOJ filed it letter of interest - the other is they don’t want the sellers predetermine the commission that the buyer’s agent is getting paid - they want that to be exclusively set by an agreement between the buyer and their agent - the DOJ is totally fine if the sellers want to pay it on behalf of the buyers they just don’t want it set by the sellers
And with I predict that the DOJ will also file a letter of interest with the court on the NAR Settlement too - because it only limits the removal of the offer of compensation in the MLS and I am betting that the DOJ will state in their letter that that doesn’t go far enough - just my opinion of how I see it playing out
As a seller and buyer in the past, the agents are getting paid too much for their services. I am not saying agents get paid nothing, but home prices are easily over 500k, paying 30k of that to agents are such a waste from the sellers perspective. I am still paying for home inspections, title insurances, financing, and many other fees.
Home prices are not over 500k everywhere and they went down 50% a lot of places in the last crash. You don't have to pay the Agents 6%.
If you dont see the value of an agents service then list your own home and represent your own purchase, no one forced you to hire an agent at 6%.
Yes the commission are super high compared to everywhere else in the world. But agents do have high costs like paying huge court judgements when caught and donations to local, county, state and Federal politicians to keep those fat checks legal. Not cheap.
There certainly isn't any requirement to pay a listing agent 3%. Discount brokers have been around for many years thanks to court judgements against brokers in the past that forced them from demanding agents all charge 3%. But owners have generally remained dumb and pay. Silly really.
The buyer's commission you should be happy to pay for 2 basic reasons. #1 The buyer pays the commission yet the agent has convinced the buyer you're paying. It's a sweet scam. Follow the money. The buyer is the only one putting money in. Or say you get 2 offers. One for $500k with a 3% commission and another for $490k and no commission? Well the lower offer of course. Duh. Wait, what? You care about your net, not "the offer price". The offer price is a pointless scam to get dumb sellers to give money away. With 2 offers, one no commission means the buy towing an agent has to pony up a offer price at least 3% higher. They pay the commission.
#2 The buyer's agent works for you the seller. They've worked the buyer over and have scammed them into thinking they represent them, but really work for the seller. If the buyer loves your house and you play hardball on price you know exactly what that agent is going to be saying to the buyer "you don't want to lose your dream house", "the market is tight right now and this type of house may not come up again", "prices are going up fast so losing this house could cost you even more next month", etc... That's their job. Get that buyer to close on any house no matter what to collect that commission. They don't care which seller as long as the commission is the same. Do you want the buyer's agent on your side as the seller or steering buyers away?
Then sell it by owner or go with a discount broker. These are not new things. Who are you to say how the FREE market works?
@@nickshomehacks buyers agents will drive the buyers to higher commission properties, not the best house for their clients
The DOJ has indicated they wanted more transparency, so by NAR offering to remove the co-op from MLS, it does just the opposite. I'm thinking this will create a lot of variation when these changes are executed locally, which in turn will create consumer confusion. 😟
Let me guess, you're an agent. Currently agents tell buyers the seller pays their commission. Yippie, FREE rides in a nice car!! Pretty easy sell. But the buyer actually does pay. Now in theory buyer agents will have to tell buyers the truth "I want $15,000 to drive you around if you buy a $500k house." That's transparent and is going to be a little harder to sell. I assume agents will just create other lies like "I'll get the seller to pay my commission" and then steer the buyer away from sellers not playing the game. No doubt it will work, but still harder. And there could be a few more buyers that pause and think about it and decide maybe they'll trying buying on their own and get $15,000 back at close instead.
Agents, brokers have always been masters at pulling these scams on sellers and buyers. They've overcome past lawsuits trying to force some honesty. They've pushed millions of $$$ at local, county, state and Federal lawmakers to keep their scams legal. I have no doubt they will again with this. But it's another chip at their scam. A bit more sunshine. Someday, maybe, it will become an actual marketplace. Pie in the sky maybe. But possible.
It will change something.
Finally someone who is honest about what real state agents where doing to get highest commission
From NAR.
Implications for members:
There will continue to be many ways in which buyer brokers could be compensated, including through offers of compensation communicated off MLS
as we have long
believed that it is in the interests of the sellers, buyers, and their brokers to make offers
of compensation- but using the MLS to communicate offers of compensation would no longer be an option.
The types of compensation available for buyer brokers would continue to take multiple
forms, depending on broker-consumer negotiations, including BUT NOT LIMITED TO:
Fixed-fee commission paid directly by consumers.☝️
Concession from the seller.☝️
Portion of the listing broker's compensation.☝️
Compensation would continue to be negotiable and should always be negotiated
between agents and the consumers they serve.
That sounds pretty much like business as usual to me🤔
I am mostly a listing agent. How do we pay the buyer's agent?
You're no longer obliged to. You negotiate one if you want to.
That's hilarious you don't read your own listing contract. If you can read look for the bit that says something like "Broker is authorized to cooperate with and compensate..." blah, blah, blah 2.5% or 3%. If you can't read ask your broker.
And agents wonder why people think they're over paid.
@@MrWaterbugdesignand there lies the problem
Will be interesting to see how this plays out in the marketplace. Agree....Buyer Agents will have to submit a commission request within the offer to purchase. Buyer may need to kick in some cash, if seller or listing agent don't agree to pay the commission buyers agent wants.
When I list (FSBO or cheap listing) I always offer to pay all closing costs and the buyer or buyer agent 3%. I can do that because as a seller I never pay those, but buyers are told I do. So wow, I'm handing the buyer like $20k!!! Cool!! Buyers love it. And they don't have to haggle either over closing costs. As a seller I only care about my net. I don't give a rat's butt whether that 3% goes to an agent or back to the buyer. No agent, the buyer deposits the full price into escrow and then gets 3% back. What do I care. If a buyer wants to pay themselves or an agent 10%, 20%, don't care. The price just needs to cover it. Investors love it too because they know they don't have to walk me thru the numbers. They already know the buyer pays everything. Plus because I don't use a listing agent I can drop the price nearly 3% and still get my price. Huge advantage.
I see many FSBO complain in their listing about paying a buyer agent or just 1%, 2%, 2.5%. Dumb as dirt. They're not paying it. Agents have gone to all this work to set up this scam on buyers and these morons aren't playing a long. Dumb.
In our local market, the notion of steering clients to properties that pay a higher commission is laughable. When the market crashed 2007/2008ish we went from about 80 Active listings on any given day to 800+ Active listings. As of this morning, there were 52 total Active listings, and that number has been below 100 for the past year or two (spiked up to about 175 during Covid). So in our local market, steering wouldn’t even be an option if one was so inclined. For any given buyer there may be only 1 property (or commonly, 0 properties) that meet a buyer’s general requirements.
As a Realtor and a son to a owner of a Brokerage for over 20 years. This isnt going to change much at all, went through the NAR e-mail and settlement procedures and its not going to change much at all. Commission is still negotiable and Agents wont work with people who are going to pay a lower commission.
It can increase buyer pull through - commitment - because they know your deal upfront. I like it. As long as they don’t cap *** or cause pointless hurdles in compliance *** I like it.
That seems correct to me. Just keep steering buyers away from sellers not paying your demanded fee. I mean sure we tell buyers we represent their interests, will get them the right house for them and blah, blah, blah. But come on, we need to eat so F them.
The only issue is maybe a few buyers aren't total morons and will start to ask questions if we have to get them to sign a contract that we get our 3% taste no matter if the seller agrees or not. But screw it, they haven't caught on so far, so no reason to think they'll start thinking now.
@MrWaterbugdesign I'm going to find somebody that's going to take my 1 or 2 percent... We know you guys got to eat.... So it's going to be Agents out there that's gonna take it
Problem, reaction, solution. Time will who and how will the solution be implemented. But one thing is for sure, according to the WEF, "in thw future you will own nothing and you'll be happy about it"
Being a listing broker will be incredibly profitable from here on in! Ka $ Ching!
Such a BS. First things first, the buyer pays for everything - seller and both agents. Period. Irrespective of buyers affordability, both agents are motivated to close a deal - to pocket their commission. This is good for the seller who is sitting on so much equity in this frenzy of a market. The buyers have been pushed to a point where they prefer renting over buying more now than ever before. You dug your own grave. 😂😂🎉🎉🎉
What are you talking about? The sellers typically pay for both agents
In my case I found the house and I decided the bid. Except for the paper work he did nothing and made 20k for what? People say it’s the seller who loses money but he doesn’t accept a bid that doesn’t include the commission fees
The business model of commission pay can be deceiving when one plays out as you experienced. Realtors work A LOT for FREE until we close on a house. Sometimes it's 30 before a client buys. NO lie. Sometimes that person who we showed 30+ never buys. And, then there are those that require countless hours, and we may end up with less than minimum wage. Then, once in a rare blue moon, one comes along like your example, and helps to make all of the stress and long hours, and continuing education, lic fees, etc all make financial sense. What a blessing to that agent, because I can promise you, those are a rare occurrence.
should we work for any amount??
You should earn your pay like most people. There are 1,554,604 agents. Most are worthless, yet get paid the same. If you're a good agent buyers will gladly pay you. If you're the standard crap agent it's going to get tougher. Good agents will have more buyers and see their income increase a lot as crap agents starve.
Good agents will start using more tools, automation to handle more buyers. With that they will be able to drop their fees even further, get more buyers and earn even more. Most likely the dual agency scam will likely disappear as agents realize it's better to market themselves strictly as being a seller's agent or strictly as a buyer's agent.
This is how most businesses operate. I know, scary having to actually compete. Hot looks and a sweet ride won't be the best tools you have any more.
As a listing you you should never pay a buyers agent. The whole system needs to change.
1% Lists? Never heard of this brokerage. Why don't you sell for free while your at it
Be nice
This is America - last I checked it’s a free country - they are entitled to run their business and charge whatever they want
@@gregboudreau5778 im not sure how how selling a house for 1% is a good business model.
As an investor I will list and expect the co op agent to ask for commission on the contract. That way the buyer will see it plainly. If I negotiate the contract and lower the agent co op the buyer will see that too. If the agent tries to steer the buyer then I have documented legal grounds to sue that broker.
You don't sound like any investor I've ever met. All investors I've met know full well the buyer pays the buyer's commission. What's the point of negotiating down the commission? That's dumb as dirt. The buyer's agent works for the seller. I'm thrilled to pay a buyer agent 3% because I can get 4%, 5% even 10% more in price because I have the agent telling the buyer "it's still a good deal", "you want to get it before someone else starts bidding", "you said it was your dream house" and whatever con they have to run to get that house to close and $$$ in their pocket.
Negotiate the commission down??DING, ? You're nuts. Agent will walk. They tied up that buyer and they're not going to sell that buyer for less than 3%. At least that's how it's been.
Same when buying a listed property. I call the listing agent, tell them I'm an investor and have no agent. Their minds go ding, ding, winner, winner, chicken dinner...DOUBLE COMMISSION!!! And that I'd interested in them finding me more similar properties. DING, DING, DING!!! Now they're working for me, telling me everything they know about the seller. Bottom price, condition issues seller is worried about, their financial state, what they had for lunch, etc... When I present a low offer that agent will push it 9 out of 10 times. Seller trusts the agent because they're representing them after all. I mean, they did say that, right? Buyers always pay both commissions. No buyer, no sale, no commission.
Agents may rationalize these scams to feel better about it. But that sure doesn't stop it.
@@MrWaterbugdesign A- buyers don’t pay the “buyers commission” in my part of the nation. Buyers agents expect the seller to offer a 3% co op. All sales commissions come from the sellers proceeds. B if the buyers agent tries to back out of a deal over their reduced commissions that’s perfect grounds to sue, under the same grounds this lawsuit was won on. And I would have documentation from the contract. So please steer buyers from listing after they have offered a contract, I welcome the lawsuit and the potential millions from their broker. These two very simple points tell me you are actually the one without the experience to be commenting.