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.
Real estate transactions are too damn complicated. Too many crazy variables that come up before closing and require negotiations to work things out or walk away. No artificial intelligence can account for that or the unpredictable minds of human nature.
If you read the article, you would know that humans are involved in the negotiations, etc.
Again, absolute fact in the vast majority of home sales in the USA:
One has to proactively seek out a 6% commission arrangement, and choose that rate.
For many years, the average commission has been much lower in most markets.
So for the majority of consumers, the "standard 6%" is a choice and a nearly irrelevant strawman in the discussion.
What is the average total commission in your market?
I disagree about “proactively seeking out 6%.” In my experience, that is the “standard.” You can find lower but THAT is what you have to proactively seek out.
What is the average total commission in your market?
I disagree about “proactively seeking out 6%.” In my experience, that is the “standard.” You can find lower but THAT is what you have to proactively seek out.
Meh.
Potato-Potahto.
There are so many alternate models, it's a coin flip how one may go about locating agreeable fees, supporting the question why anyone who is fee-motivated would blame agents for 6% listings.
Yes, there are exceptional ethical issues with an agent labeling another agent, or themselves, as "discounters," but it is a viable search term despite the ethical issues.
In my neck of the woods the most common rate in 5%, split 50-50 between the listing and selling brokerage firms and then split between each respective brokerage and the agents who worked with the seller and buyer.
Far more listing brokerages are cutting their listing fee from 2.5% while the 2.5% co-op is solid.
I'm not stating that AI is the new way to sell real estate (it's certainly interesting), however, how is using targeted demographics(for lack of better wording) gathered through data points ineffective? It's a marketing tool used all the time, real estate is one of the largest "markets."
It is ineffective because it costs the same amount to target a much larger demographic. In that scenario choosing the smaller demographic is foolish.
There are so many alternate models, it's a coin flip how one may go about locating agreeable fees, supporting the question why anyone who is fee-motivated would blame agents for 6% listings.
Yes, there are exceptional ethical issues with an agent labeling another agent, or themselves, as "discounters," but it is a viable search term despite the ethical issues.
I called one of the companies listed in those results several times (and not even because they were discount), because they have a great website for searching which IMO was much better and more up to date than any of the MLS searches agents set up for me. Never answered.
I called one of the companies listed in those results several times (and not even because they were discount), because they have a great website for searching which IMO was much better and more up to date than any of the MLS searches agents set up for me. Never answered.
So what is the average commission in your market?
Most of my work is in Wake County.
As stated many times here, 90% of resale listings in Wake County show a 2.4% commission to buyers agents.
That is very easy to cite with MLS access.
So, the general interest is the listing commission, and that cannot be found in the MLS data.
So, I can't answer your question with significant data backup.
I can say, anecdotally, I see more total commissions in the 5% neighborhood then I see in the 6% neighborhood.
You called one firm that dropped the ball, and quit?
Most of my work is in Wake County.
As stated many times here, 90% of resale listings in Wake County show a 2.4% commission to buyers agents.
That is very easy to cite with MLS access.
So, the general interest is the listing commission, and that cannot be found in the MLS data.
So, I can't answer your question with significant data backup.
I can say, anecdotally, I see more total commissions in the 5% neighborhood then I see in the 6% neighborhood.
You called one firm that dropped the ball, and quit?
Yes I know you've said about the 90% being 2.4% to buyers agents. But the last time you said that it seemed like you were saying many of those were 3.6% to the listing agent. And since you've also said you can't see the listing side, I was curious how you were pretty confident that the average commission was "much lower." Even by your own admission, if you see more "in the 5% neighborhood than the 6% neighborhood," it sounds like your estimate is that the average might be at best like 5.25% Is that "much lower than 6%"?
Well I wasn't going out and specifically looking for something less than 6%, but I interviewed about 8 agents over a 2-year span (was listed twice), asked many questions including about commission %'s and they were all firm on 6%, except one who did have one maybe 5% option but I think it was basically us paying for all photography, measurements etc. so probably would have cost just as much if not more in the end. In fact the first time we listed, we pulled it for personal reasons, then were in touch with the first company that listed when we went to list again about 2 years later. I mentioned to them that we had actually found someone that was potentially interested and if they were the buyer would they consider a lower commission - they pretty much never responded to our communication after that. We did have one unique situation that I thought would be helped by having a "full-service" agent, but probably wasn't.
But I think the argument many are making is that they think the commission for the same services that are currently being provided should be lower. Yes, there are lower commission rates available, but in most cases they involve far fewer services. I do find it funny that you are one of the few agents on here (maybe the only that I've seen) that admits to listing for a lower %, yet you still seem to be public enemy #1 to the RE agent haters on here. But yes, maybe single-agent brokerages or whatever the official name is is the best bet for a seller to get "full service" representation for a lower commission rate.
Yes I know you've said about the 90% being 2.4% to buyers agents. But the last time you said that it seemed like you were saying many of those were 3.6% to the listing agent. And since you've also said you can't see the listing side, I was curious how you were pretty confident that the average commission was "much lower." Even by your own admission, if you see more "in the 5% neighborhood than the 6% neighborhood," it sounds like your estimate is that the average might be at best like 5.25% Is that "much lower than 6%"?
Well I wasn't going out and specifically looking for something less than 6%, but I interviewed about 8 agents over a 2-year span (was listed twice), asked many questions including about commission %'s and they were all firm on 6%, except one who did have one maybe 5% option but I think it was basically us paying for all photography, measurements etc. so probably would have cost just as much if not more in the end. In fact the first time we listed, we pulled it for personal reasons, then were in touch with the first company that listed when we went to list again about 2 years later. I mentioned to them that we had actually found someone that was potentially interested and if they were the buyer would they consider a lower commission - they pretty much never responded to our communication after that. We did have one unique situation that I thought would be helped by having a "full-service" agent, but probably wasn't.
But I think the argument many are making is that they think the commission for the same services that are currently being provided should be lower. Yes, there are lower commission rates available, but in most cases they involve far fewer services. I do find it funny that you are one of the few agents on here (maybe the only that I've seen) that admits to listing for a lower %, yet you still seem to be public enemy #1 to the RE agent haters on here. But yes, maybe single-agent brokerages or whatever the official name is is the best bet for a seller to get "full service" representation for a lower commission rate.
This is an odd post.
Why would it be "funny" for me to point out uninformed input and to oppose repetitive puerile trolling and dissembling obviously stemming from an agenda only to stir trouble?
Shouldn't anyone who claims to value fundamental integrity and informed opinion react similarly?
Of course, I am more in the mode of ignoring trolls at this time.
"Hate" is never a productive emotion, and that point is supported by several posters here who are filled with Keyboard Courage, and by the lack of substance in most of their generic Copy/Paste posts.
I do appreciate your mention that I don't hesitate to take a stand for informed input and integrity, however. Thanks for noticing!
I accept results of studies that show 5%-5.2% rates as median, and can support them, anecdotally of course, with my own experiences.
Clearly, your experiences are also anecdotal, too, right? 8 agents. How many firms and which firms were the 8 agents with?
8 different firms?
Last edited by MikeJaquish; 05-11-2018 at 06:42 AM..
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.
