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.
I don't have all kinds of time this morning to read this whole thread, but I'm curious.... if this "base price" is something everyone agrees is a "reasonable" price for the house based on listing price, days on market, comps, and market conditions (which is a pretty significant price reduction already) how are we now getting the house for 10,000-20,000 less than that? Just our awesome skills? Didn't our awesome skills also help determine the base price?
You know... in the real world, there are two major players who decide the fair selling price, buyer and seller, and your arbitrary decision that the above house is $45,000 over priced, does not make the seller (or his equally savvy agent) agree to your price, no matter how slick and savvy your agent is. And there are many many times where we never arrive there... Sometimes people are never going to agree. And we have to pick up, move on, and try again another day, another place.
Negotiation is arriving at a price and terms that both sides can be happy with... not necessarily trying to suck the most money we can out of the other side. They too, have goals and dreams and brains and good representation.
We just spent the last two days negotiating a deal with multiple offers, where price was really only one factor important in the decision. It was a complex situation... They all are. Sometimes the best priced offer isn't the one most likely to close. Key is understanding all the issues important for our client and helping them choose the best offer to hopefully get there.
As a buyer I don't really care if the seller is happy about the selling price and I'd be happier negotiating my own deal than to be represented by an agent who is just looking to make everyone happy.
I said early on that this would not work for everyone. You've made it very clear that you wouldn't want to risk losing a little for the opportunity to work for a lot more; so be it. I would just hire someone who has the drive, confidence and ability to enter into such a "stupid" agreement.
So you want to hire an agent that is willing to skirt the SC agency guidelines and laws? The only way you can move forward and have an agent perform client based activities (such as showing homes) in SC in accordance with agency guidelines mandated by SC is by having an agency agreement in place. Anyway, it is a stupid idea and you've not responded to practical questions on how to make this work which tells me you don't know how so I'm done entertaining you.
As a buyer I don't really care if the seller is happy about the selling price and I'd be happier negotiating my own deal than to be represented by an agent who is just looking to make everyone happy.
People who are unhappy with the terms don't sign contracts, nor do they get through the next month and a half of negotiations and coordination about inspections, repairs, and appraiser demands. Unhappy people don't close the deal.
the idea of the agent getting paid more when they earn more is fine. and earn = did a "better" job for the buyer. The problem is trying to create benchmarks for "better", and even moreso when the benchmarks cannot be "one size fits all".
People who are unhappy with the terms don't sign contracts, nor do they get through the next month and a half of negotiations and coordination about inspections, repairs, and appraiser demands. Unhappy people don't close the deal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoBromhal
the idea of the agent getting paid more when they earn more is fine. and earn = did a "better" job for the buyer. The problem is trying to create benchmarks for "better", and even moreso when the benchmarks cannot be "one size fits all".
I also hate the current buyer's agent system. And I usually don't find myself on the same side of issues as BoBromhal.
However, I have to agree with these points and many of the others on this thread. It's not a practical plan to set up and overly complex things have a way of screwing consumers in the end.
It's correct that price is just one of the many 'wants' involved in a negotiation. And if you beat someone over the head too hard on price, you usually end up paying for it some other way in the end. Look at procurement departments in companies. They do sometimes beat up suppliers just around price but heavy incentives to save cost is old school. Businesses realized that it's counterproductive and overall value and productive partnerships with suppliers aren't built. You lose in the end. 'Modern' incentives for procurement now are not so singly focused on saving money.
I also hate the current buyer's agent system. And I usually don't find myself on the same side of issues as BoBromhal.
However, I have to agree with these points and many of the others on this thread. It's not a practical plan to set up and overly complex things have a way of screwing consumers in the end.
It's correct that price is just one of the many 'wants' involved in a negotiation. And if you beat someone over the head too hard on price, you usually end up paying for it some other way in the end. Look at procurement departments in companies. They do sometimes beat up suppliers just around price but heavy incentives to save cost is old school. Businesses realized that it's counterproductive and overall value and productive partnerships with suppliers aren't built. You lose in the end. 'Modern' incentives for procurement now are not so singly focused on saving money.
We agree on a point! The answer isn't price negotiation but I wish there was a way to reward quality service or punish poor performance but most such barometers are subjective.
So you want to hire an agent that is willing to skirt the SC agency guidelines and laws? The only way you can move forward and have an agent perform client based activities (such as showing homes) in SC in accordance with agency guidelines mandated by SC is by having an agency agreement in place. Anyway, it is a stupid idea and you've not responded to practical questions on how to make this work which tells me you don't know how so I'm done entertaining you.
SC "guidelines" have nothing to do with the proposal. If there is a specific law that would prohibit something like what I have outlined please educate us. Your labeling this "stupid" without any support for your argument doesn't say much other than the status quo is just fine with you regardless of what a potential client might prefer.
I believe any questions you have raised have been previously answered.
People who are unhappy with the terms don't sign contracts, nor do they get through the next month and a half of negotiations and coordination about inspections, repairs, and appraiser demands. Unhappy people don't close the deal.
Really? It seems to me that these pages have seen many people who are unhappy with contracts and closings, often long after they have signed them and completed purchases or sales.
the idea of the agent getting paid more when they earn more is fine. and earn = did a "better" job for the buyer. The problem is trying to create benchmarks for "better", and even moreso when the benchmarks cannot be "one size fits all".
Thank you.
I'm sure with that attitude, rather than blind adherence to current norms, a willing agent and client could custom tailor an agreement that would suit both and be financially beneficial to both.
I couldn’t agree more with Just_Because on the lack of value proposition for buyer’s agents. I am in the process of buying my 2nd house. With the first house, I was willing to accept my agent just sucked. But now, it’s starting to feel like the system sucks and the incentives are perverse. I’m sure there are still good agents out there who put ethics over profit and actually try to represent the clients’ best interest. But it feels to me like the majority just want to make the sale as quickly as possible.
My agent offered no useful information on neighborhoods or locations beyond what I could find myself on the internet. She offered little to no useful information on pricing or the market. Much like my previous buyer’s agent, her commentary was mostly geared toward that houses are going to go fast so we should jump on things as quickly as possible. Meanwhile I saw a lot of stuff sitting on the market. In both cases when I bought a house, I felt pressured to buy asap and my concerns were minimized.
The things I really needed her for that I could not get anywhere else was someone to let me in the door for showings and someone to provide sold comps to determine how much to offer. She just emailed me a list of comps with no analysis. When I asked for a price she refused to answer then just came up with a number with no justification. I had to do the analysis myself, and I’m still concerned we paid too much (will find out soon, appraisal in progress).
In NY, a real estate attorney is required. I’m paying my attorney a flat fee of $600. Her services have been invaluable to me, and it’s comforting that someone is actually looking out for my interests and not just trying to close the deal ASAP. Meanwhile, my agent will be making over $8,000 commission on the sale. I realize she has expenses, etc but the difference is staggering. I’ve never paid so much for so little service in my life. And I know I’m not paying her directly, but everything is technically coming out of my pocket.
It was my attorney who advised me to get an additional inspection on some aspect of the house the general inspection could not see. That ended up uncovering a major issue. My attorney has only been practicing for a few years, my agent has supposedly been doing this for decades but it was the attorney who had the knowledge about what inspections I needed to do, and the inclination to protect my best interest even if it might kill the deal. Meanwhile my agent is telling me not to get something looked at because it can be fixed with a little paint. Once you sign the contract, the buyer’s agent is all about getting to closing and not about making sure your interests are protected. As the buyer, I’m assuming all of the risk if the house turns out to be a lemon. If the buyer’s agent isn’t providing value, I’d rather dispense with them and find some other way to be able to look at houses and access sold comps without paying thousands of dollars.
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.
