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.
<<<"They agreed to compensate other brokers who helped sell those properties, and the first MLS was born, based on a fundamental principal that's unique to organized real estate: Help me sell my inventory and I'll help you sell yours.">>>
I don't know what your own, personal alternative definition of cooperation is but it's not relevant here as the NAR is clear as to what it means in this context.
You can argue that the official NAR / DoJ information is wrong but that's a difficult road to take. Anyway, consumers can read it for themselves so no need to argue. it's very clear and I think that consumers should be very concerned if any agent is denying this information, providing their own explanation of how the model works that conflicts with this official version, or otherwise tries to muddy the waters regarding the fact that a core part of the model is that buyer's agents are helping sellers agents to sell their house.
Any agent who deviates from this or provides misinformation on this point would be guilty of misrepresentation and potentially fraud.
Am I missing something that is even supposed to be controversial or sinister about this?
Location: Was Midvalley Oregon; Now Eastside Seattle area
13,062 posts, read 7,497,585 times
Reputation: 9788
JMO,
I'd rather have the property priced a little low rather a little high. More traffic. Some people don't realize that property is a bid-ask transaction. Some may see a relatively high priced property and immediately reject its eligibility. Currently we are selling, REagent has priced it a bit high, house (1976) needs a desperate update.
YMMV
You're right of course, I guess I engage mostly for the sake of others reading, so they know we do not agree with such a point of view.
So, address the topic without engagement or attribution to trolls.
People will have facts to consider and you won't be encouraging disruptive trolling and narcissism.
All trolls are narcissists at heart. Any attention feeds their egos. Even abuse, as long as they can turn the focus of the thread to themselves.
The spotlight is their grow light.
Take it away and they wither.
Am I missing something that is even supposed to be controversial or sinister about this?
Nothing controversial at all. It's the model. It's how it works. Not all consumers realize this.
Strangely, we've had agents try to disavow this as lies or written by some random intern who didn't know what they were talking about. All kinds of reasons to discredit official information from the NAR / DoJ Settlement.
In fact, on this very thread, a Mr Bo Bromhal seems to be suggesting that there is some kind of alternate explanation to what the NAR officially explains regarding the MLS system that they oversee and what cooperation means. And a Mr Mike Jaquish is saying I'm lying for just posting official NAR information. So while people like you Diana just accept it as uncontroversial and the way it just works, others seem to have problems and disagreements with it.
The meaning of 'cooperation' is very clear in that official Department of Justice - National Association of Realtors page. It means 'help sell' as in the buyer's agent is there to 'help sell' the seller's agent's house. I don't know what you're talking about with something that's been explained to me. It's crystal clear and does not require explanation or spin from you. And why would a sellers agent agree to split his/her commission (often half or more) to a buyer's agent if he/she wasn't helping her/him sell the house?
Directly from the NAR included in the official DoJ Settlement information:
<<<"They agreed to compensate other brokers who helped sell those properties, and the first MLS was born, based on a fundamental principal that's unique to organized real estate: Help me sell my inventory and I'll help you sell yours.">>>
I don't know what your own, personal alternative definition of cooperation is but it's not relevant here as the NAR is clear as to what it means in this context.
You can argue that the official NAR / DoJ information is wrong but that's a difficult road to take. Anyway, consumers can read it for themselves so no need to argue. it's very clear and I think that consumers should be very concerned if any agent is denying this information, providing their own explanation of how the model works that conflicts with this official version, or otherwise tries to muddy the waters regarding the fact that a core part of the model is that buyer's agents are helping sellers agents to sell their house.
Any agent who deviates from this or provides misinformation on this point would be guilty of misrepresentation and potentially fraud.
all you gotta do is contact the NC Real Estate Commission and open a complaint. They've got a website and a phone number. I think you'll have to provide your identity though.
I would point out, without reading the link again - and in case your fellow consumers decide not to read the link - that the DOJ case was 2007-2008 whereas the description you quote (but conveniently left out) begins with this:
In the late 1800s...
Until the late 80's/early 90's, there was no Buyer agency.
Until about 2005, there was no internet.
the DOJ Antitrust suit didn't really have anything to do with "broker cooperation" - in your choice of usage nor mine - at all. Here's from the DOJ's very own summary...
Quote:
requires NAR to allow Internet-based residential real estate brokers to compete with traditional brokers. The Department said the settlement will enhance competition in the real estate brokerage industry, resulting in more choice, better service, and lower commission rates for consumers.
I'm not living in Silicone Valley, SFB or CA or any upscale neighborhood. I'm in the Midwest.
A property came on the market Thursday, it's a condo. Listed at $122,900, I viewed it immediately, I was the first to view and submitted an offer. Within an hour, the agent that showed me the property called and said that the buyer is doing highest and best on Sunday at 5:00 pm. This agent works for the listing agent. I'm assuming there's no conflict of interest here. The listing does not state highest and best/multiple offers received but that's the feedback I'm getting from the agent that showed me the property. Yesterday morning, my revised offer is in the running. Later that afternoon, your offer won't cut it, I suggest you offer $XXX XXX.
The market can only appraise at the sold comps. I'm not liking the way it seems the listing agent is going about the sale. If I was the seller, I'd list it for what the comps dictate, not try to ensue a bidding war, it has to appraise out, unless your a cash buyer, which I'm not.
My guts saying just forget about it as I dislike this game and it clearly feels like one. It's a "hogs get slaughtered, pigs get fat" deal, IMO.
I'll wait for any replies & thoughts.....
The goal of a bidding war is to inject emotion into the purchase process. People will spend more when emotions dictate
I guess I don't see it as a scandal that buyer's agents are trying to help clients with the process of buying homes... Homes that their clients WANT, that are for sale, usually represented by other agents, who we work cooperatively with because it's generally neater and more productive than beating them up.
We work to get the best deal possible for our client, they work to get the best deal possible for theirs. Neither side has a sure advantage or disadvantage in this relationship, it really depends on the circumstance. Part of our skill and talent, is in reading the situation correctly and knowing what is needed to get to close. Not just because we want it, but because our client wants it!
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.
