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.
There is a huge difference between trying to sell someone something, and helping someone buy something they want to buy.
I am nowhere near smooth enough to do the first one.
We have multiple posters in this thread who have repeatedly asserted they will be completely unable to grasp or accept your point.
Who have indicated:
No grasp of the concept of "service to clients."
No understanding of how someone could possibly operate with integrity, putting client interests first.
No acceptance of the business rewards of working for client satisfaction first.
No recognition of the much greater rewards an agent can attain by taking care of a family and protecting their interests, rather than throwing them under the bus and milking them for every possible penny.
You are speaking a language to them that they cannot interpret, because discussion of those fundamental concepts is equivalent to describing a sunset to a blind person.
And, unfortunately, another reasonable thread has been turned into self-centered narcissistic trolling.
I think the OP was able to separate the wheat from the chaff, got the information he wanted, and seems to have made an intelligent and informed decision.
Good for him.
Too bad that the trolling and dissembling remain, and naïve consumers may fall for that, and may be taken in by anonymous people who would carelessly hurt them for cheap internet thrills.
Last edited by MikeJaquish; 02-20-2018 at 02:12 AM..
I wonder - trying to give you the benefit of the doubt - if you think "cooperate" means agents on opposing sides get together and collude against the interests of their clients, particularly the buyer.
as to the OP, you have certainly gotten a lot of info, some of it helpful, and some off it indicative of how other consumers feel about the process.
I would make one point about Dual Agency.
I would 100% agree that if you don't feel comfortable having your agent also represent the seller, that you're clear about that with the agent. But if the agent you choose works for a larger firm that has a good-size market share, the dual agency concern can be much MUCH less. If you just say "no dual agency", then you cannot work with your agent on any of their company's listings. Because you are technically the company's client, not the agent's, and the seller is the same. Dual Agency = same brokerage representing both parties. I know all of this has been laid out in the WWREA link MikeJ provided you, but perhaps this is a little different wording that will also help clarify it to you.
I get it if a Buyer, after discussing the workings of Dual Agency says "Hey Bo, I don't want to buy one of your listings" I would gladly get them assigned to another qualified agent with my company (designated agency). But my company is involved in 1 out of every 6 sales in our market, so a simple "no dual agency" would either eliminate a large number of homes or you'd have to have a 2nd agent working for you from another company when you wanted to buy one of my company's listings.
I am curious, Bo, how often you have to give up both clients?
When you have any knowledge of the two parties', their finances, including a preapproval amount, urgency, flexibility, etc, that could give one of them an advantage over the other, don't you have to give up both of them to designated agents?
Of course, this will put either or both of them in a position of working with an agent they haven't interviewed and vetted, right?
I have worked with agents whom I would not consider as acceptable providers if I was a consumer, and I would be very uncomfortable if they were designated as my fiduciary without interview and vetting.
What is the consumers protection in the case of being handed off to a designated agent?
KW/Cary didn't allow designated dual agency when I was there, and of course, I "don't" now.
Identifying proactive and purposeful lying is not hyperbole.
We have seen many operators over the years here on CD who are entirely unfettered by decency or integrity, who willingly would hurt consumers to get their sly digs in on agents.
Lying is lying, and routinely in evidence. The only real shame? That it is cloaked in anonymity, so the liars don't have to own their lies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJaquish
We have multiple posters in this thread who have repeatedly asserted they will be completely unable to grasp or accept your point.
Who have indicated:
No grasp of the concept of "service to clients."
No understanding of how someone could possibly operate with integrity, putting client interests first.
No acceptance of the business rewards of working for client satisfaction first.
No recognition of the much greater rewards an agent can attain by taking care of a family and protecting their interests, rather than throwing them under the bus and milking them for every possible penny.
You are speaking a language to them that they cannot interpret, because discussion of those fundamental concepts is equivalent to describing a sunset to a blind person.
And, unfortunately, another reasonable thread has been turned into self-centered narcissistic trolling.
I think the OP was able to separate the wheat from the chaff, got the information he wanted, and seems to have made an intelligent and informed decision.
Good for him.
Too bad that the trolling and dissembling remain, and naïve consumers may fall for that, and may be taken in by anonymous people who would carelessly hurt them for cheap internet thrills.
I think we are all better off if we just respond to points made rather than hurling insults or talking about what kind of people we think posters are, etc. Anything trying to draw general conclusions about people is personal in nature and responsible posters should aim to avoid that. Stick to the topics being discussed rather than insults.
Sure, a sales person can give advice to a client in the course of trying to sell him something. My point was that you can't assume the role of an advisor and a salesperson at the same time. They are mutually exclusive. The fact that he is trying to sell something precludes him from being a proper advisor.
A point that's well recognized in business.
Not in my business. A salesperson can most definitely assume the role of an advisor. There is no conflict of interest whatsoever, regardless of how they are being paid. It's simply a matter of ethics and personal intent. I regularly advise people NOT TO BUY ANYTHING. Why? I judge that they are not financially or emotionally ready to be homeowners. I conclude that buying a home would be adverse for their circumstances and I tell them to rent, and I don't do rentals.
Well, this is a new concept; that something all thinking people who are concerned about protecting themselves, have known for centuries, now requires Internet validation.
Is it really surprising to you that selling something to someone contains an inherent conflict of interest with providing the maximum benefit to that person's interests? Come off it.
I act as both salesperson and advisor. I have providers that act as both salesperson and advisor to me. I'm a college graduate and successful. My degree is in economics, and a prior career was as advisor first/sales second. It seems to me the 2 can mutually exist. I'm being told they cannot, and that it's a basic business principle.
I'm just trying to find the "Basic business principle". I read a lot. Maybe not enough to have seen this in print.
I've been down the conflict of interest rabbit hole numerous times on this forum. Essentially, as humans our entire lives are conflicts of interest. What is best for me may not be best for you, but humans tend to make decisions based upon their own self-interest.
Some define our self-interest as TODAY. What will I do TODAY to maximize my self-interest TODAY. I - and several of the other professionals that are trying to give advice and guidance to the OP who will not be our client (none of us work the CLT market) - tend to see our self-interest as something to accumulate over a number of years. I can do my best for my clients, and make them happy so that they use me in the future, and maybe o happy that they refer their family, friends, co-workers to me. That is a long-term income stream. Or I can spend $1,000's of dollars TODAY gathering internet leads from the type of people who do not care about the relational aspects, just TODAY'S transaction. And then do it all over again next month.
Not in my business. A salesperson can most definitely assume the role of an advisor. There is no conflict of interest whatsoever, regardless of how they are being paid. It's simply a matter of ethics and personal intent. I regularly advise people NOT TO BUY ANYTHING. Why? I judge that they are not financially or emotionally ready to be homeowners. I conclude that buying a home would be adverse for their circumstances and I tell them to rent, and I don't do rentals.
It sounds like we're saying pretty much the same thing. A sales person (someone whose job it is to sell things) can assume a role of an advisor. This does not mean that their job magically turns from being a sales person to an advisor.
Any decent salesperson does exactly as you say. Trying to sell things to people who don't have the money or aren't ready usually doesn't work out well for anyone, including the salesperson. They are more likely to be flakey, waste everyone's time, change their minds, not come up with the money, be unhappy customers if they ever buy, etc. And if they easily agree with you when you suggest that they might want to rent for another year, then that's a pretty good qualifier that they are not confident and committed to buy anyway. Everyone including you is better off.
There probably is a conflict of interest in the scenario that you describe as your own interest might be at odds with that of your client (definition of a CoI). A CoI does not suggest that anyone is doing anything wrong. It's very important for agents and everyone to recognize the existence of conflicts so I get nervous when agents fall all over themselves to deny the existence of conflicts of interest. We're all adults and we understand conflicts of interest. Just be open about them.
Not in my business. A salesperson can most definitely assume the role of an advisor. There is no conflict of interest whatsoever, regardless of how they are being paid. It's simply a matter of ethics and personal intent. I regularly advise people NOT TO BUY ANYTHING. Why? I judge that they are not financially or emotionally ready to be homeowners. I conclude that buying a home would be adverse for their circumstances and I tell them to rent, and I don't do rentals.
Once the client has engaged me, I step past a sales function completely.
The sale is closed when the client engages me, although I have to continue to be worthy of their business.
This is not a fine point, and not immaterial to the agent/client relationship.
A sales function is preliminary to engagement, and distinctively different from ongoing fiduciary-level client service, always.
Yes and it's ironic that someone is talking about 2018 in the same breath as someone using the same realtor their whole life. "Three generations of Smiths bought homes through Jones Realty and now I'm ready to buy my first home so I know where I'm going!" That's exactly the business model of insurance agencies but the problem is that millennials want no part of that even if they were going to live in the same town all their lives. That model is built for decades ago and is dying. Yes, people move around far too much for this and consumer preferences are changing fast.
The industry has not been good about solving the trust problem which is a bigger problem when you don't have or can't have an ongoing relationship with an agent. With buyer's agents, a smart consumer will say "wait a minute, you get paid with sales commission so the more I pay, the more you make? And you have a huge incentive for me to buy quickly so you get paid?" Their only answer is "trust me, I won't cheat you. I'm not like other agents. You come before my commission". But as noted, the standards are very low to become an agent. It's far too easy. Many don't know what they are doing. Interviewing helps but most are going to sound good. Most can at least do a decent pitch to prospects and consumers don't really even know what to look for. Unfortunately it's a minefield out there for consumers.
I think you can say this for any industry. Plumbers, contractors, car salesmen, auto mechanics (don’t get me started on auto mechanics), etc. I’m not stupid or arrogant enough to think I can go learn everything and be self sufficient. I’m not going to learn plumbing because I’m afraid some plumber is going to take advantage of me.
You can do things to minimize people taking advantage of you. Read reviews. While not perfect, they help. Go check professional websites and organizations for complaints, etc. We buy our cars through Costco and it’s amazing how much pull they have. You get the idea.
I talked to a number of agents and was able to weed some out. Some sent me MLS listings by email without my asking. While I appreciate that, I hadn’t made a decision, so I asked them to stop. They pretty much refused. Another started sending me listings from their firm, then argued with me when I ruled them out. Another one was steering me towards the high end of my price range (there’s less competition at that price). She pushed back when I explained I’d rather stay a bit lower. All of these I ruled out. As I said in a previous post, the exclusive buyers agent was pushing for me to buy NOW and not wait to get there and rent first. According to him I can learn all about every neighborhood in the area over a few days. No thanks.
When you have an agent, your brain doesn’t take a vacation. If my price range is up to $400,000 I’m not letting someone talk me into a $500,000 home, even if I can qualify for it.
I narrowed it down to two and took Mikes advice. I asked if I could unilaterally terminate the contract at any time and asked if they required a dual agency agreement up front. One responded and said he didn’t really like the dual agency thing and didn’t do it very often. He said it happened once in a hundred times or so and another agent would be assigned if that’s what I wanted to do. He also asked for a chance to fix a problem before the contract was terminated but said they want to work with people that want to work with them. Sounds reasonable. I’m still waiting for the other to respond.
Bottom line is I’m going with an agent. I understand it’s the largest purchase of your life, but you can be represented and still protect yourself.
I think you can say this for any industry. Plumbers, contractors, car salesmen, auto mechanics (don’t get me started on auto mechanics), etc. I’m not stupid or arrogant enough to think I can go learn everything and be self sufficient. I’m not going to learn plumbing because I’m afraid some plumber is going to take advantage of me.
You can do things to minimize people taking advantage of you. Read reviews. While not perfect, they help. Go check professional websites and organizations for complaints, etc. We buy our cars through Costco and it’s amazing how much pull they have. You get the idea.
I talked to a number of agents and was able to weed some out. Some sent me MLS listings by email without my asking. While I appreciate that, I hadn’t made a decision, so I asked them to stop. They pretty much refused. Another started sending me listings from their firm, then argued with me when I ruled them out. Another one was steering me towards the high end of my price range (there’s less competition at that price). She pushed back when I explained I’d rather stay a bit lower. All of these I ruled out. As I said in a previous post, the exclusive buyers agent was pushing for me to buy NOW and not wait to get there and rent first. According to him I can learn all about every neighborhood in the area over a few days. No thanks.
When you have an agent, your brain doesn’t take a vacation. If my price range is up to $400,000 I’m not letting someone talk me into a $500,000 home, even if I can qualify for it.
I narrowed it down to two and took Mikes advice. I asked if I could unilaterally terminate the contract at any time and asked if they required a dual agency agreement up front. One responded and said he didn’t really like the dual agency thing and didn’t do it very often. He said it happened once in a hundred times or so and another agent would be assigned if that’s what I wanted to do. He also asked for a chance to fix a problem before the contract was terminated but said they want to work with people that want to work with them. Sounds reasonable. I’m still waiting for the other to respond.
Bottom line is I’m going with an agent. I understand it’s the largest purchase of your life, but you can be represented and still protect yourself.
You're definitely on the right track.
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.
