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 no advantage. FSBOs take longer to sell (statistically) and sell for less (statistically) than houses on the MLS. And offering 1.5% to buyers' agents is about as good as offering 0.
I know I'll get slammed by everyone who thinks agents are worthless and you can sell your own home easily thanks to the internet, but that's just not reflected in the data. A huge majority of FSBOs will list with an agent within five weeks of trying to sell it themselves. There's a lot more to selling a house than putting a sign in the yard and opening the door.
We sold our house in Acworth (north of Atlanta) in 3 days FSBO.
Our house was on MLS... We were able to sell it for more that we owed, grossing a 30k profit.
We had it on the market months before with an agent, and never got an offer... it's all about timing...
FSBO's sell for more net to seller on average. Misinformation put out by NAR and disseminated by agents. Many sellers go with an agent after time because agents convince buyers they work for free and keep them away from FSBO's for reasons already discussed.
Can you prove that or are you just guessing? I don't know how anyone could say they come out better with or without an agent because each case is unique. You can't sell in a vacuum and you can't have a control to test off of.
"They do define a "seller" FSBO as one with limited representation or no representation for that study."
I'd appreciate knowing where they clearly do that...chapter/exhibit?..limited representation would be what?
"Flat fees can be full representation so it is important to distinguish between flat free limited rep (usually $300 or so) and full representation flat rates which is like what Help-U-Sell type of brokerages are."
Why is it important?...
Last edited by dunespeak; 03-30-2015 at 03:11 PM..
Reason: forgot to put something in quotes...thanks fer askin
Can you prove that or are you just guessing? I don't know how anyone could say they come out better with or without an agent because each case is unique. You can't sell in a vacuum and you can't have a control to test off of.
A study by Stanford University economists Douglas Bernheim and Jonathan Meer supports the Andersons' concern. They found that homes on campus using real estate brokers sold for 5.9% to 7.7% less than homes sold without brokers.
previous discussions here about how the "agents can sell homes for more money" pitch used by realtors is false. the report the NAR puts out means that the average listing price of homes is more than FSBO's, not that agents can sell a property for more.
every situation is unique, but on balance - fsbo's net more to the seller.
A study by Stanford University economists Douglas Bernheim and Jonathan Meer supports the Andersons' concern. They found that homes on campus using real estate brokers sold for 5.9% to 7.7% less than homes sold without brokers.
previous discussions here about how the "agents can sell homes for more money" pitch used by realtors is false. the report the NAR puts out means that the average listing price of homes is more than FSBO's, not that agents can sell a property for more.
every situation is unique, but on balance - fsbo's net more to the seller.
The canned study, with controlled conditions has been exposed here before as a farce in these discussions.
Let's go off campus, for a study with some relevance.
FSBO's sell for more net to seller on average. Misinformation put out by NAR and disseminated by agents. Many sellers go with an agent after time because agents convince buyers they work for free and keep them away from FSBO's for reasons already discussed.
if done properly, FSBO's can net more.
But most FSBO's are not done properly.
I'm convinced that studies show FSBO's net less because they just stick a sign in the yard and hope passersby see it. They're not reaching all possible buyers.
I sold my last two places in FSBOs, one after the listing agent could not sell it in six months. And after she did like four open houses and MLS it and the house was literally filed with cards from other brokers who showed it.
I don't think it's fair to say that your agent could not sell it.
You just didn't accept the offer.
But I applaud the work you did as fsbo. You went balls out.
When you have a house in a high traffic, popular location that is not even for sale, and people stop by to ask if they can please buy it, you probably can sell it yourself.
The National Association of Realtors says:
"FSBOs typically have a lower median selling price, though FSBOs typically received 98 percent of their asking price, whereas agent-assisted sales typically received 97 percent of their asking price. Some of the explanation for this is that when looking at FSBO sales where the seller knew the buyer, 59 percent of the time the sales price was equal to or more than the asking price. Sellers who started as a FSBO, then ended up using an agent, had the lowest sales price in comparison to asking price and reduced their price the most of all selling methods" Profile of Homebuyers and Sellers
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.
