U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 01-26-2009, 09:03 PM
 
36 posts, read 95,417 times
Reputation: 21

Advertisements

It is a matter of opinion and your needs.....''

If you need to move?

Have you been on the market long??

Are your open houses more deserted than atlantic city??

Keeping you from your goals??

If you answered yes to any of the above ...pay the realtor the 4%.

Every month you sit on the market you could more than that 4% of house value, plus the hassle of strangers in your house.

Now if you answered no than you can tell that realtor to pound sand..politely of course.

If you need a good realtor I could reccomend you one;-)
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-27-2009, 06:01 AM
 
353 posts, read 631,230 times
Reputation: 203
If you choose not to use a Realtor that is fine... Prices in NJ are adjusting down at a rate of about 1% per month... meanwhile you are paying your mortgage and other costs... the key in this market is to price your house correctly and get in and out of the market AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

If the Realtor has a good buyer and can close sooner then later, the 3 or 4% is a worthwhile investment if the alternative is wait to find someone on your own while your value diminishes.

I think your 3.5% agreement works for everyone.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2009, 06:04 AM
 
353 posts, read 631,230 times
Reputation: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mranger View Post
I am a licensed broker and I personally feel that is very unethical. I have personally sold FSBO properties to buyers with as little as 2%. The fact is if a buyer wants to see a home the agent has a fiduciary responsibility to show the home. I would ask what firm the agent works for and get their name. Now this may seem a bit extreme but I would consider reporting this person to the state Real Estate Commission or at least call the commission and get their opinion on this issue. This kind of price gauging practice needs to stop and is not very smart by any agent. I have a very good relationship with all my past clients due to just treating everyone the same and being fair. I love helping FSBO sellers succeed in their quest to sell FSBO.
Realtors, like anyone else have the right to ask for as much as he/she can get... Commissions are always negotiable and there is no set rate (like the prime rate is a set rate).

The Realtor may be short sighted by asking too much, but that is up to him/her.

With your logic, should the Realtor change $50.00 due to his/her fiduciary responsibility?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2009, 12:02 PM
 
Location: Middlesex Nj
26 posts, read 123,309 times
Reputation: 32
Ridiculous to suggest to work without a realtor. Absolutely absurd.

So would you advocate going straight to sales center or listing agent??

HMMMMM Who's best interest are they going to look after yours???

Finding a home is the easy part! Its the stuff that comes after where buyers agents are worth there weight in gold.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2009, 12:35 PM
 
498 posts, read 572,774 times
Reputation: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewMensch View Post
Realtors, like anyone else have the right to ask for as much as he/she can get... Commissions are always negotiable and there is no set rate (like the prime rate is a set rate).

The Realtor may be short sighted by asking too much, but that is up to him/her.

With your logic, should the Realtor change $50.00 due to his/her fiduciary responsibility?
no one is claiming they don't have the right to ask it. But to restrict your client from seeing a house because you want more than you would typically get on a transaction is a little shady. Furthermore, it kinda defeats the interests of every party on this market. One person mentioned that since prices are falling at 1% a month, then he should bite the bullet and accept the deal. What about the flipside. Since prices are falling, maybe the real estate agent should bite the bullet and simply show her client the condo now rather than holding out for a bigger commission because is the price of the house falls far enough, 4% may end up being less than 3%.

Like I've said before, I'm sure there are plenty of agents out there that would be willing to do the deal at 3%.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2009, 03:36 PM
 
353 posts, read 631,230 times
Reputation: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by theoakman View Post
no one is claiming they don't have the right to ask it. But to restrict your client from seeing a house because you want more than you would typically get on a transaction is a little shady. Furthermore, it kinda defeats the interests of every party on this market. One person mentioned that since prices are falling at 1% a month, then he should bite the bullet and accept the deal. What about the flipside. Since prices are falling, maybe the real estate agent should bite the bullet and simply show her client the condo now rather than holding out for a bigger commission because is the price of the house falls far enough, 4% may end up being less than 3%.

Like I've said before, I'm sure there are plenty of agents out there that would be willing to do the deal at 3%.
If prices have fallen 15% in the past few years, then our fees have lost 15% as well.

The market is the market. We are no more responsible for declining prices then we are for prices when they are climbing.

That said, 3% is reasonable.

What I meant was that standing on principle and not paying a commission to a Realtor with a good buyer is short sighted if the alternative is to find a different buyer months down the road when prices have fallen further. This will cost the seller far more then 3 or 4% of today's selling price.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2009, 04:01 PM
 
Location: Stewartsville, NJ
7,577 posts, read 14,882,699 times
Reputation: 1180
Quote:
Originally Posted by theoakman View Post
no one is claiming they don't have the right to ask it. But to restrict your client from seeing a house because you want more than you would typically get on a transaction is a little shady. Furthermore, it kinda defeats the interests of every party on this market. One person mentioned that since prices are falling at 1% a month, then he should bite the bullet and accept the deal. What about the flipside. Since prices are falling, maybe the real estate agent should bite the bullet and simply show her client the condo now rather than holding out for a bigger commission because is the price of the house falls far enough, 4% may end up being less than 3%.

Like I've said before, I'm sure there are plenty of agents out there that would be willing to do the deal at 3%.
Quick question... why is it exceptable for everyone else to have "business savvy" but when a realtor tries to get the most that they can, it's considered "unethical". Business is business!
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2009, 04:13 PM
 
1,529 posts, read 2,937,541 times
Reputation: 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by wileynj View Post
Quick question... why is it exceptable for everyone else to have "business savvy" but when a realtor tries to get the most that they can, it's considered "unethical". Business is business!
Because they hold themselves out as "agents", which implies that they are bound by some fiduciary duties to act according to your wishes and put your interest ahead of their own. Yet time and time again far too many of them fail to live up to that, and even those that do meet those obligations are tainted by the stain of scandal, because realtors don't sufficiently regulate their own profession with any meaningful discipline.

But I agree with you, let them get the most that they can. Let's just call them "used house salesmen" and then everyone is on notice that they're just out to make a buck like anyone else, and will refrain from putting any undue trust in them.

Last edited by Lusitan; 01-27-2009 at 05:44 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2009, 05:14 PM
 
36 posts, read 95,417 times
Reputation: 21
WOW! Its Lets throw realtors under the bus day!! All of you who would suggest to tell the realtor to go pound sand..........

Consider this you would rather sit on the market.....

Have strangers go through your house everyday..........

When I sold my multi-family I listed at 7% Why???

3 % to my sellers agent to handle all the headaches And..........

4% to all buyers agents..........Why???

Human nature thats why. If any of you wouldnt agree to work harder and for more money...........

You are a verydishonest person... or you are not human :-)
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2009, 05:19 PM
 
498 posts, read 572,774 times
Reputation: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by wileynj View Post
Quick question... why is it exceptable for everyone else to have "business savvy" but when a realtor tries to get the most that they can, it's considered "unethical". Business is business!
you missed the point. If the realtor was business savvy, he/she would be willing to work for a 3% commission to get the sale done ASAP rather than risk the possibility of not getting it done. If the realtor is so "business savvy", why not go for broke and demand a 6% commission?
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top