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.
Marc: In other words, the RE Brokering profession has no longer remained attractive to either the agents themselves or to the buyers. Paraphrasing your response above: "...since many prospects just remain-potential buyers only and do not buy, the one poor guy/gal who ultimately lands-up buying after the REA's 'service`, lands-up paying through the nose for it, as not only s/he pays for the service that was specifically-rendered to him/her, but, indirectly, lands-up paying for others' past services also".
Now, if every buyer starts analyzing in this fashion, and the technology's progress is making their jobs easier, what will happen to the REB industry? Will it follow the same path as the traditional news-paper industry, as we are witnessing today? BTW: Does the nareb compensates you in some fashion, for being the, sorta like, resident-spokesperson on this forum? Or, you solely do it to increase your customer-traffic?
Absolutely correct. Both perform a vital service for people who could do it themselves if they had the time, knowledge & tools to do so, but who, because of the infrequency with which they need the service, choose instead to pay someone else. Additionally, both professions are seen by some who don't know better as being unimportant. Well said.
By the way, the word is REALTOR, not relator. And while MOST real estate agents in the USA are REALTORS, meaning they are members of the trade group the National Association of Realtors, not all are. In referring to the entire group of professionals, you probably want to use the term "real estate agents."
So much bitterness, yes? Perhaps somebody's ex is a realtor? Or perhaps someone was a realtor himself and washed out? Could be just general dumbness also, but to me it seems like something more...
Marc: In other words, the RE Brokering profession has no longer remained attractive to either the agents themselves or to the buyers. Paraphrasing your response above: "...since many prospects just remain-potential buyers only and do not buy, the one poor guy/gal who ultimately lands-up buying after the REA's 'service`, lands-up paying through the nose for it, as not only s/he pays for the service that was specifically-rendered to him/her, but, indirectly, lands-up paying for others' past services also".
Now, if every buyer starts analyzing in this fashion, and the technology's progress is making their jobs easier, what will happen to the REB industry? Will it follow the same path as the traditional news-paper industry, as we are witnessing today? BTW: Does the nareb compensates you in some fashion, for being the, sorta like, resident-spokesperson on this forum? Or, you solely do it to increase your customer-traffic?
You know what? Every industry is basically temporary. Life changes, jobs change, industries come and go. If and when it dies, I'll just be good at something else. But it's not going away just yet. Much of the job is not about finding houses or marketing or doing research. It's acting as an intermediary between conflicting parties whose interests are often both contrary and emotionally charged. In many cases, houses I have sold would not have made it to a closing without a rational voice (me) keeping everyone calm and focused on their goals. Although the Internet has changed how we do the job, it really has not changed the essentials of the job all that much.
And no, nobody pays me to post here. I speak only for myself. And increasing customer traffic is not a goal in this forum, I am much too outspoken and opinionated. If I were concerned about lead generation from City-Data, I would be informative, but also bland and obsequious. I am more toned down on several of the more real estate focused sites like Trulia and Zillow. Having said that, I have received some excellent clients from City-Data. But my goal here is just to mix it up philosophically with my fellow NJ citizens. And the level of discussion here is surprisingly high considering the relatively light touch of the moderators.
Last edited by Marc Paolella; 01-10-2012 at 10:16 PM..
My friend thinks that, if folks plan properly, every seller should first explore the FSBO option for a few months and then only list it with a RE agency. For example, if one needs to get 450K, in hand, after selling the house, s/he should list it to sell it at that price. And, when he/she goes out to list with the agent after a few months, it has to be listed for ~ 473.6K, assuming 5% commission, to get the same $450K in their own hands. That means, whatever advantages they may get out of the "supposedly" wider-publicity, REA-service etc. factors, is partly neutralized by the need to list the same property at a higher price!! And these days, almost all buyers are penny-pinchers! And because of that, one can even argue that, the full-5%-listing proposition may be a loosing option in this economy, after all is said and done. The only category of folks who might oppose this argument enthusiastically, are either REAs or associated with the REB industry! Given ample, cheap, fast, direct MLS listing options available these days, at almost 90% savings compared with the 5%-commission-based traditional-listing option, it will be a folly to not explore this option first for a few months, if possible. It can be a win-win for both the seller and the buyer!
My friend thinks that, if folks plan properly, every seller should first explore the FSBO option for a few months and then only list it with a RE agency. For example, if one needs to get 450K, in hand, after selling the house, s/he should list it to sell it at that price. And, when he/she goes out to list with the agent after a few months, it has to be listed for ~ 473.6K, assuming 5% commission, to get the same $450K in their own hands. That means, whatever advantages they may get out of the "supposedly" wider-publicity, REA-service etc. factors, is partly neutralized by the need to list the same property at a higher price!! And these days, almost all buyers are penny-pinchers! And because of that, one can even argue that, the full-5%-listing proposition may be a loosing option in this economy, after all is said and done. The only category of folks who might oppose this argument enthusiastically, are either REAs or associated with the REB industry! Given ample, cheap, fast, direct MLS listing options available these days, at almost 90% savings compared with the 5%-commission-based traditional-listing option, it will be a folly to not explore this option first for a few months, if possible. It can be a win-win for both the seller and the buyer!
None of this is new. It's a free country, and this option is available to all, and has been for the past 50 years in one form or another. Yet here we are in 2012, well into the Internet era, and 90% of all listings are still with brokers. Either everyone is dumb, or we are still providing a good value.
I'll chime in. I recently closed on our first house 6 months ago. Me and my wife had been looking online and via open house for about 18 months prior, in order to get to know the market AND the inventory. Once we were ready to buy, we HAD to get a realtor. Why you ask? Because we wanted to see certain houses that werent having open houses, and since there was no way i was going to net the buyers agent commission, i called a realtor who had worked with a family member of mine.
Now here is the thing, I called him to tell him what listings to show us. In the 12 months we worked with him (if you can even call it working with him) he took us to see 5 houses (3 houses on one outing, 1 house another, and 1 house another for a total of 3 appointments over the 12 months). He knew we were particular, and knew what we wanted and didnt bother sending us listings etc which we were okay with. We knew about the houses when they hit, we checked all the sources daily. When we zero'd in on a house, I had already pulled the comps for the various neighborhoods we were interested in. So i knew the market value of the areas (days on market, original list price, closing price etc). I knew the taxes, i knew how much the seller was into the house for etc. Most of it i could glom off the net (zillow, property sites, public records).
The realtor did come to the home inspection, but was a no show at the closing (on vacation). My communication during the process was with our lawyer. Never heard from the realtor again.
Now, in my case, i am avery detail oriented person, and almost OCD. Biggest purchase in our lives, you better believe we are going to do our homework. Do I think our agent deserved the 3% commission? Absolutely not. I would have done it myself had i been able to net the savings
That being said, we have friends who are house hunting now, and dont know anything. They know nothing about homes, construction, the mortgage process, nothing, they are clueless. The wife just wants granite and shiny appliances. Do I think a realtor would be good for them? Yes. They arent interested in doing the homework I did, which is fine. So in that instance, yes I do feel, realtors due provide a service. However, I think that should be paid by the buyer, not the seller. And the savings should be reflected in the "REAL" market value of the house. Not the market value with realtor commissions baked in.
Just my 2 cents.
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.
