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.
Yes you were misleading, but thank you for admitting it.
Irony: During the edit I actually deliberated multiple times on which word to use in place of misleading.
You see, I didn't think (and still don't think) that misleading was the appropriate term. I assuredly never meant to mislead anyone, especially the public when it comes to evaluating the motives of RE agents.
However, I found it quite difficult to summon the correct nomenclature- if their exist such a thing- when it comes to decribing my mistake. Perhaps mistaken would have been the simpler and more appropriate use of language.
Thank you for giving me the chance to clarify.
I also thought to use the word "mis-informed" instead, but I refrained, as the term infers to someone who were themselves deliberately misled.
After all, I do give at least some allowance or forgiveness, regarding what others are imploring.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Hoffman
I hate it when people mislead the public, especially when they do it on purpose.
Yes of course, and I agree with you 100%. I too especially can't stand when someone fabricates their own scenarios in order to push some agenda only unbeknownst to them, as was the case a couple of weeks ago when a certain regular poster in this forum took it upon their self to attempt to defame my own character, and libel my good user name (HINT: assailant's name rhymes with Pike Jawfish)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Hoffman
Yes, proof is difficult to provide when it's an unsubstantiated claim. Unless you went out and interviewed most agents or worked in the industry as an agent I don't think you can make that claim, but tell me more of your "extensive research." I'd like to know what it was. Certainly a few replies on a thread isn't enough to support your claim but let's further dissect your proof.
I already conceded that providing you proof to substantiate my claims may not be easy- especially when considering most agents who want to keep their reputations intact will likely only give hints to the truth, which is likely easily discerned by all interested parties at this point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Hoffman
Last I checked the agent doesn't pick the offer that's accepted, the seller does.
True, but the agent can and may often still crap in their pants when another buyer comes to the foray, no?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Hoffman
Most sellers I've worked with take either the one they think is most likely to close and/or the offer that nets them the highest amount. Whoever wrote the offer is irrelevant in those scenarios.
Ahh, but we weren't talking about the Sellers now were we? I thought we were taking about agents, and their own fears and consequential actions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Hoffman
It may in some instances, but it's the sellers call on how to proceed. This is not proof that "agents are afraid of multiple offers". We only need one buyer, but multiple offers is even better.
Again, I never claimed to offer any hard proof; merely speculation. However, it is actually argued whether or not "multiple offers is even better". Just ask Mike Jaquish. He will tell you something entirely different (although it may be only to suit his own personal agenda- whatever that may be)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Hoffman
It happens sometimes but is also dependent on the market. Again, sellers call. No proof that an agent is afraid of multiple offers in this statement. It's merely an observation on buyer fears.
Sure, but such observations might undoubtedly reflect an agent's inner fears, no?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Hoffman
Right, since you used the words "may not always" this is a true statement but it's again not proof that agents are afraid of multiple offers but again just an observation that human nature can vary. In fact, sometimes those fears can be reversed with the seller and the agent.
Perhaps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Hoffman
I do and I did. Do you have more to offer? What I'd really like to know more about is the extensive research.
I used the word "extensive" in the sense that my research extended beyond this forum. I doubt I could recall any actual links from articles I had read or separate threads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Hoffman
Did you poll agents? Did you read articles that provided data to support your claims. Maybe some links would help.
Again, much of what I stated was just based on common sense, and some very practical points of view provided by agents on this forum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Hoffman
Answers in red inside the quote.
Yeah, I noticed, and subsequently it made quoting you a real PIA. Maybe for simplicity sake you can work on replying like everyone else, aye?
Last edited by riggy_house; 11-07-2017 at 09:01 PM..
Again, I never claimed to offer any hard proof; merely speculation.
one post, you say MOST agents. Not "I suspect" or "It seems like". Merely "most". Then you told us -as I've provided the definition above - that you did EXTENSIVE RESEARCH
Quote:
doing further extensive research on the subject, these are just some of the things I have found that stand to reason why many agents out there won't be jumping for joy and clicking their heels when other parties of interest show up to buy a house
they don't stand to reason, they stand to speculate.
as far as libeling and defaming, I suppose you'd first have to identify yourself. Just as you can't defame a fictional character, I'd assume it's hard to defame an anonymous one ... since a person has to KNOWINGLY spread false or malicious information.
as to the now question at hand about whether agents don't like multiple offers ....
Buyers' Agents don't, almost ever. I can't really think why any Buyers Agent would, but I'm sure there's a rare instance.
Seller's Agents do like multiple offers, almost uniformly, though the case of "hey, I'm gonna earn both sides of the commission" DOES occur. If an agent got caught doing this, though, then they'd be in a world of trouble.
I cannot fathom another case where a Listing Agent says "Darnit, Seller, we've got multiple offers. That's not so good, and here's why"
Usually in an auction, you can see and know what the other bids are.
I wish it WAS more like an auction in multiple offer situations, so you could know what you're up against... and you know what you lost to also, without waiting til it closes.
"OK folks, we have a 320K conventional at 60 days... can anyone top that?" would be better and seem less like trickery to nervous clients than bidding up in the blind, not even knowing for sure if they are or are not already the high bidder or whether the other bidders even exist.
There is no reason that it can not be like an auction....To my knowledge nothing would legally prevent you from disclosing the current submitted contract prices, and terms IF your client agreed in writing to allow you to disclose this information.
I see no reason a web site for the property in a mulitple offer scenario could not be updated to state something to the effect that seller will post the terms of offers received on this site and will stop reviewing offers at such and such date/time.
Allowing other buyers to know the terms of the existing offers is not running an auction...it just requires permission (in writing) from the seller to disclose the terms of the other offers.
I can't think of any rule that prohibits a seller from discussing the terms of the offers submitted...they are certainly not confidential so long as the seller agrees to allow you to discuss.
Would multiple escalation clauses more 'resemble' an auction scenario? From personal experience (in our high demand/low inventory market), when there are multiple offers often times you can have more than one with an escalation clause. The way I've seen these handled is that 'best & highest' is called for, and then used to 'escalate' the escalations. So there is a little more of "OK I have this in hand, so now give me yours, and back & forth & so on... Granted I've seen them written poorly, but regardless of which side I'm on I make sure everything is substantiated.
This is just weird to me--why would I not encourage multiple offers for my seller, am I missing something?
Just a couple of reasons why escalation clauses aren't legal in Texas.
You really just don't seem to understand how heart-strings work Mike, which I would think would be an important grasp for you considering your line of work.
FOMO also comes into play when a buyer thinks they may lose something they have their heart set on.
Consequently, often when a buyer thinks they are the only one making a purchase, they will tell themselves that it's worth a certain price "to them". Then, like a child who suddenly realizes they may lose a new toy to another child, the house becomes more valuable "to them" when another buyer comes along. It's really that simple.
This phenomena encompasses far more than mere real estate transactions, e.g. art and jewelry sold on eBay etc.
But in regards to the OP's inquiry, I doubt the auctioneers "hard look" will have any meaningful effect anytime soon when it comes to altering RE legislation or the revision of some boards Code of Ethics.
From what I gather most RE agents are a bunch of fraidy pants when it comes to soliciting multiple offers, as they fear such competition may cause their buyer or all interested parties to "back out".
The amount of paranoia I've witnessed from agents in these regards seems quite palpable, and in no way that I can see does such a mindset align with the attitude of an auctioneer.
What ARE you on about? Do buyers agents love multiple offer situations here? No, but they certainly don't discourage their clients from submitting offers based on their existence - in fact, the past few years, if we did, we wouldn't be writing any offers at all.
And seller's agents love them - why wouldn't they?
Also, that heart-strings thing you're talking about and trying to advise Mike, of ALL people on here, about? Dealing with those is, indeed, part of our job - it is our job to take the emotion out of the situation and keep the buyer's feet firmly on the ground with comps and chanting the word "appraisal" if necessary. No agent will last very long who isn't able to do that, not as a buyer's agent, anyway. Pretty sure Mike knows about that even without your sage advice.
What ARE you on about? Do buyers agents love multiple offer situations here? No, but they certainly don't discourage their clients from submitting offers based on their existence - in fact, the past few years, if we did, we wouldn't be writing any offers at all.
And seller's agents love them - why wouldn't they?
Also, that heart-strings thing you're talking about and trying to advise Mike, of ALL people on here, about? Dealing with those is, indeed, part of our job - it is our job to take the emotion out of the situation and keep the buyer's feet firmly on the ground with comps and chanting the word "appraisal" if necessary. No agent will last very long who isn't able to do that, not as a buyer's agent, anyway. Pretty sure Mike knows about that even without your sage advice.
Geez Mike, where do you find these things? I love your random and obscure music knowledge.
LOL
In my heart?
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.
