Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
The entire Broker/Agent arrangement is really a scam in my opinion. When you first start you need a mentor, you don't need someone to take 30% of your income....you can get your own office, you can get your own signs, you can get your own insurance, you can get everything.
No more than an Attorney working for a major law firm or striking out on their own when they are fresh out of Law School.
There are many advantages to starting with a large firm and once you get experience possibly going out independent.
I would think it would be extremely difficult for someone just getting in the business to immediately start their own Brokerage.
Personally, I see the overhead and risks of my Broker and am very content with being one of the high paid agents split wise with that company.
No more than an Attorney working for a major law firm or striking out on their own when they are fresh out of Law School.
There are many advantages to starting with a large firm and once you get experience possibly going out independent.
I would think it would be extremely difficult for someone just getting in the business to immediately start their own Brokerage.
Personally, I see the overhead and risks of my Broker and am very content with being one of the high paid agents split wise with that company.
I got into the business in 2005.
On April 1, 2006, it became mandatory for licensed agents to show two years experience under a Broker In Charge to open a firm. Prior to that, one could go to school, pass the tests, and hang their shingle as a real estate firm.
In March, 2006, there was a flood of declarations of independent firms. Many of them no longer exist, as they were not ready.
I was with KW 7 years to the day when I went independent. It was more than enough, but the two year minimum is hardly enough, proved by the many licensees who just never go independent because they are comfortable with a big brand.
No more than an Attorney working for a major law firm or striking out on their own when they are fresh out of Law School.
There are many advantages to starting with a large firm and once you get experience possibly going out independent.
I would think it would be extremely difficult for someone just getting in the business to immediately start their own Brokerage.
Personally, I see the overhead and risks of my Broker and am very content with being one of the high paid agents split wise with that company.
I agree with you whole heartedly that it would be difficult to start on your own without experience but the Brokerage requirements are a legal barrier to doing so, and I am adamantly opposed to that. If you think you need the experience to succeed, then you need to make the education/testing requirements much more difficult....legislating restriction to those who have succeeded in the education/testing is doing nothing more than making the big brokerages bigger.
The majority who wanted to go independent day one would probably fail, but there are some who would excel...In law school, once you pass the bar, you are an attorney. While it may be beneficial for experience to work under or with someone else, you are not required to do so. I could have opened my own law firm 1 minute after I was sworn in. In Texas now you have to work under a Broker for 4 years, close x number of properties, etc, etc....it is a legal barrier to entering the market, and it is stiffing competition to the big brokerages.
Personally, I put very little value at all in the "Brand"....I know those who are super Brand loyal will beat me over the head for that, but the straight truth is that you are the "Brand" if you are exceptional and stand out in every single way then I don't care if your sign is Red, Green, Blue, or Purple.
That said, if you don't have a brand it may be hard to get listings or clients without knowing alot of people in your area....you will basically have to market yourself.
Personally, I would rather start from scratch and build my own brand. I would find an independent broker who will accept a flat fee per transaction and market myself...I'd build my contacts and work on becoming my own shop. I see no big future for anyone who is content working for someone else. To be successful, you need to be your own boss...not answer to anyone.
The entire Broker/Agent arrangement is really a scam in my opinion. When you first start you need a mentor, you don't need someone to take 30% of your income....you can get your own office, you can get your own signs, you can get your own insurance, you can get everything.
Mark, I will not beat you in anyway but to the bank. In 2011, RE/MAX, LLC commissioned an in depth study of who, why, and when people purchased or listed homes. One of the questions was branding and the importance.
Let me just put it this way, GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, Nissan, and every major auto dealer advertise the "brand" every possible moment and way. That branded advertising drives people to dealers' doors. Same in so many industries, including real estate.
Your method will work for 1 in 100 people. There are major real estate brands who lose 50% of their people within one year of joining. There are major brands who almost never lose agents.
In my office, you get the "brand" for $3102 per year and 5% of your closed commission income. Oh, well, different strokes for different folks.
PS: did you start the way you suggested to the OP writer?
No more than an Attorney working for a major law firm or striking out on their own when they are fresh out of Law School.
There are many advantages to starting with a large firm and once you get experience possibly going out independent.
I would think it would be extremely difficult for someone just getting in the business to immediately start their own Brokerage.
Personally, I see the overhead and risks of my Broker and am very content with being one of the high paid agents split wise with that company.
Mark, I will not beat you in anyway but to the bank. In 2011, RE/MAX, LLC commissioned an in depth study of who, why, and when people purchased or listed homes. One of the questions was branding and the importance.
Let me just put it this way, GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, Nissan, and every major auto dealer advertise the "brand" every possible moment and way. That branded advertising drives people to dealers' doors. Same in so many industries, including real estate.
Your method will work for 1 in 100 people. There are major real estate brands who lose 50% of their people within one year of joining. There are major brands who almost never lose agents.
In my office, you get the "brand" for $3102 per year and 5% of your closed commission income. Oh, well, different strokes for different folks.
PS: did you start the way you suggested to the OP writer?
No - and I am not suggested the OP do so, Im merely venting. It takes experience to be good at something - I am not naive . However, I do not like, and I am adamantly opposed to a legal barrier to entry....the requirement for an Agent to work under a broker for 4 years, severely impacts consumer choice when it comes to brokers, and it severely limits an agents ability to run his own business.
No matter what a new agent does, he must find a broker to "sponsor" him. 99.9% of brokers charge for that service, despite only intervening when absolutely necessary. If the requirements of being a broker need to be more strict education wise, etc, I am fine with that - but the current system in place here prevents a person from going at it on their own, starting a business, and running it without the input or direction of another person is just a big barrier to entry. Most likely supported by the large brokerages lobby efforts.
That requirement effectively drives new agents to larger brokerages where they pay money to then work independently and then pay commission for the privilege of working for someone else. Most people get paid to work - new agents pay someone else to then go work for them.
The big brokerages started small...all of them. We have a large local brokerage here in Houston that in nearly all of the more rural areas will out sell any of the large national brands 10:1
I merely believe that a person who is willing to take the risk, and give it a shot alone, should have the opportunity to do so if they can pass all licensing requirements. If that means tougher licensing requirements, I am ok with that. Just no barriers to entry that are effectively road blocks built by larger brands.
No - and I am not suggested the OP do so, Im merely venting. It takes experience to be good at something - I am not naive . However, I do not like, and I am adamantly opposed to a legal barrier to entry....the requirement for an Agent to work under a broker for 4 years, severely impacts consumer choice when it comes to brokers, and it severely limits an agents ability to run his own business.
No matter what a new agent does, he must find a broker to "sponsor" him. 99.9% of brokers charge for that service, despite only intervening when absolutely necessary. If the requirements of being a broker need to be more strict education wise, etc, I am fine with that - but the current system in place here prevents a person from going at it on their own, starting a business, and running it without the input or direction of another person is just a big barrier to entry. Most likely supported by the large brokerages lobby efforts.
That requirement effectively drives new agents to larger brokerages where they pay money to then work independently and then pay commission for the privilege of working for someone else. Most people get paid to work - new agents pay someone else to then go work for them.
The big brokerages started small...all of them. We have a large local brokerage here in Houston that in nearly all of the more rural areas will out sell any of the large national brands 10:1
I merely believe that a person who is willing to take the risk, and give it a shot alone, should have the opportunity to do so if they can pass all licensing requirements. If that means tougher licensing requirements, I am ok with that. Just no barriers to entry that are effectively road blocks built by larger brands.
Your points are understood, but if I may... Point by point, choose your weapon, I'd be ok if you take a prescribed amount of formal education. You know similar to the four years college to become an accountant or teacher, or you can do as in most states with no more than a high school diploma and 60-180 classroom hours go out and practice under a broker willing to take all the risks while you learn under his or her watch.
I agree with you that the large broker model is broken, but be certain to separate the large broker from the large brand. For example, my firm is a true mom & pop with 25 agents and is part of the world's most effective brand.
Again, I can accept your premise that everyone should be given a shot.
some states you dont even have to go to school .........they have you do it on line or once such school you pay 400 clams attend school for 2 hrs every wed. for a month and the rest you do yourself. Seems to me its about reading and studying how to pass more than being taught anything.
some states you dont even have to go to school .........they have you do it on line or once such school you pay 400 clams attend school for 2 hrs every wed. for a month and the rest you do yourself. Seems to me its about reading and studying how to pass more than being taught anything.
That's to get a license. There is big difference between having a license and having the knowledge/experience to be successful in real estate.
That's to get a license. There is big difference between having a license and having the knowledge/experience to be successful in real estate.
We agents don't do near the education and training attorneys do to get through laws school.
That's why most states want you under a Broker for several years before you venture out on your own.
We've even made it harder to get a brokers license and while I do understand Marks complaint
I think we do the right thing.
No way should an agent who just get a license be out dealing directly with the public without the Experience, Liability, Knowledge of a more experienced Broker.
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 register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
