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 agents are for the most part useless and a dying breed thanks to the internet. They used to be good for glowing fake descriptions but now you can log on Zillow and cut through the BS. What has kept them going this long is the stranglehold they had on the MLS which is also loosening thanks to Zillow. I can do my searches on Zillow and find exactly what I want. They get a ridiculous fat commission for basically doing almost nothing and in my experience they are more interested in a quick sale (buying and selling) than in your well being.
You continue to assert this and I continue to watch agents and brokerages get sued.
I and many good agents continue to ignore the industry resistance to providing information and opinion. And there is actually no prohibition from offering information and opinion. Brokerages discourage it because it creates the need to be correct and even that may not be sufficient to protect from a suit. You can be sued for being right. And there are housing regulations that may be interpreted to make providing true and correct information discriminatory. So you need to walk carefully.
Of course on a $600,000 spectacular house I am going to offload the photography. And it is not going to my regular photo gal either. I want exquisite photos and videos and, sometimes a drone shot. I may have a friend do the drone shot as he is better than most of the pros...but I may use a pro as well.
Why would this surprise you? It may well end up in $500 to $1000 or more before the MLS listing is up. And if it is the right sort of place I may put it into national publications for another half grand.
And I am more likely to stage a $100,000 fixers...but I will use a stager if it is a big and expensive house.
Let's break this down - I continue to assert that:
1) You need no real education past the ability to read, write, walk, drive, open a door and a few hours of courses. Hardly college education - heck, hardly high school education level either (hopefully you learned to read and write in primary school!). Oh yes, basic computer and phone literacy. True or not?
2) Brokers/RE agents continue to get sued. Well, they only get sued for one of two reasons: r1) they put something on record that wasn't true or r2) they violated a law or a procedure. My point was that an agent can easily avoid either, especially r1. Now, a surgeon has to cut into the body any way you dice it, no avoiding that. A lawyer has to write that letter or appear in that court room, no matter what. An engineer has to sign his name underneath that building or bridge, no matter what.
All I hear is that the RE agent's true value is nannying the buyers and sellers 'cause it is such an emotional thing. Sure. However, as I said, people are getting squeezed from all sides (falling wages or wages not keeping up with inflation, rising taxes, getting fleeced left and right for just taking a breath). How soon before they start deciding that they are OK crying in the corner without a nanny while buying that house? On a $600,000 home, we are talking $36K of agent fees - s*it, that's almost the average yearly salary in United States....
Do you realize how much money drains away from the market to feed the RE agents? It also adds inflates the cost of each and every home. For the life of me, I still cannot compute what the value added is
I think what REALLY needs to happen is to lower the fees to 1% by law and restrict the amount of people in the field. That way the ones who do remain in the field get to handle more homes at lower fees, thus making up for lost exorbitant fees and at the same time stopping the seller/buyer robbery that is going on right now.
I only read the first 2 pages of comments so sorry if I already missed the boat but I just wanted to add my 2 cents in. I actually found the agent we used to buy our house (it was an out-of-state sale) here on CD! I posted a request for RE agent recommendations and a colleague of the agent we ended up using was the one who contacted me. He told me that he was just starting out in the business and that his mentor was the best he'd seen. So, I checked her out on several websites and search engines, liked what I saw and gave her a call. I knew within a few minutes of talking to her that she KNEW her stuff and that we were in good hands. And let me tell you something, this gal WORKED. She was not just hanging out collecting a check. She picked me up at and dropped me at the airport and at my cousin's house, showed me tons of houses, was persistent with calls to other agents, gave us all the info on the houses we were interested in, etc.
Simply put, she was the best agent I've met and now she's on my Christmas card and party list, LOL. Some agents are great and if you do your research you can find them. Just takes a little work on your part.
I've been around the business for a long time as a builder and an inspector. Like anything else, there are good agents and there are bad ones.Certainly, one should ALWAYS perform their "due diligence when selecting one." Value added? A "good" agent knows all the ins and outs and what is going on, can negotiate exceptionally well (especially when it comes to repairs from an inspection) and can navigate around all the potential pitfalls. They work hard on your behalf. A "good" agent can save you a ton of money-a bad one will cost you. Most of the agents I have worked with are honest, hard-working and have the client's best interest in mind. I must admit that I do find it funny when I'm working with a client from certain areas (primariliy the northeast) that they are overly suspicious of agents and anyone involved in the process. Perhaps in these areas people really are out to get you! Here in the South not so much.
I've been around the business for a long time as a builder and an inspector. Like anything else, there are good agents and there are bad ones.Certainly, one should ALWAYS perform their "due diligence when selecting one." Value added? A "good" agent knows all the ins and outs and what is going on, can negotiate exceptionally well (especially when it comes to repairs from an inspection) and can navigate around all the potential pitfalls. They work hard on your behalf. A "good" agent can save you a ton of money-a bad one will cost you. Most of the agents I have worked with are honest, hard-working and have the client's best interest in mind. I must admit that I do find it funny when I'm working with a client from certain areas (primariliy the northeast) that they are overly suspicious of agents and anyone involved in the process. Perhaps in these areas people really are out to get you! Here in the South not so much.
Goes back to the root of the problem: low barrier of entry.
Make it harder to get your license and people wouldn't have to worry about weeding out the bad ones.
Real Estate agents are for the most part useless and a dying breed thanks to the internet. They used to be good for glowing fake descriptions but now you can log on Zillow and cut through the BS. What has kept them going this long is the stranglehold they had on the MLS which is also loosening thanks to Zillow. I can do my searches on Zillow and find exactly what I want. They get a ridiculous fat commission for basically doing almost nothing and in my experience they are more interested in a quick sale (buying and selling) than in your well being.
You are aware of where the Zillow information comes from?
You are aware of how Zillow makes its money?
You are aware that if RE commissions go away so does Zillow?
Let's break this down - I continue to assert that:
1) You need no real education past the ability to read, write, walk, drive, open a door and a few hours of courses. Hardly college education - heck, hardly high school education level either (hopefully you learned to read and write in primary school!). Oh yes, basic computer and phone literacy. True or not?
2) Brokers/RE agents continue to get sued. Well, they only get sued for one of two reasons: r1) they put something on record that wasn't true or r2) they violated a law or a procedure. My point was that an agent can easily avoid either, especially r1. Now, a surgeon has to cut into the body any way you dice it, no avoiding that. A lawyer has to write that letter or appear in that court room, no matter what. An engineer has to sign his name underneath that building or bridge, no matter what.
All I hear is that the RE agent's true value is nannying the buyers and sellers 'cause it is such an emotional thing. Sure. However, as I said, people are getting squeezed from all sides (falling wages or wages not keeping up with inflation, rising taxes, getting fleeced left and right for just taking a breath). How soon before they start deciding that they are OK crying in the corner without a nanny while buying that house? On a $600,000 home, we are talking $36K of agent fees - s*it, that's almost the average yearly salary in United States....
Do you realize how much money drains away from the market to feed the RE agents? It also adds inflates the cost of each and every home. For the life of me, I still cannot compute what the value added is
I think what REALLY needs to happen is to lower the fees to 1% by law and restrict the amount of people in the field. That way the ones who do remain in the field get to handle more homes at lower fees, thus making up for lost exorbitant fees and at the same time stopping the seller/buyer robbery that is going on right now.
1. No rule about maximum education. I happen to have an EE degree. There are local RE Agents with MBAs and law degrees. If you want an educated agent you can have one. I would also point out the best education of an agent is to work with a skilled agent through a number of transactions so you have a basic understanding of what you are doing before you get cut loose. Again likely to be resisted by the Brokerages.
2. Most likely reason to be sued is over disclosure. It is the "knew or should have known" argument. Makes no difference you did it all correctly you still get sued. You get sued for an undisclosed defect like there is mold in the walls or because the neighbor is very difficult. In my career I have been involved in one where I had told the brokerage we should can the deal because we would end up getting sued...we did. The reason that one went bad is that the in house lawyer was playing RE Agent...and botched it.
3. There is lots of hand holding involved. For many a trying experience...not helped by doomers on the internet that have some convinced the RE world is out to rip them off.
The fees appear roughly correct. They are sufficient to keep the service available. Heavy discounters have generally failed or converted to conventional finances.
The herd that sells RE generally expands or contracts until the average agent makes in the mid $40Ks. I would suspect that a lower commission base would still end up the same place and actually have a worse outcome in terms of the quality of the people involved. And it would likely become impossible to regulate and loaded with scams and illegal operators.
3. There is lots of hand holding involved. For many a trying experience...not helped by doomers on the internet that have some convinced the RE world is out to rip them off.
The fees appear roughly correct. They are sufficient to keep the service available. Heavy discounters have generally failed or converted to conventional finances.
Many many real-estate listings in my area of Chicago use the flat-fee brokers. So it is a fallacy expounded by real-estate agents that the low cost brokers are going under. Any more talkin' points?
And the brokerage with the largest number of agents in Las Vegas went bust late in the last decade. Could not stand the slow down in the market. And Redfin went conventional...could not make its rebate system work with salaried agents.
There will remain a few niche brokers who get by on alternate models. If any of them really work well they will grow and become more prevalent. If they don't they will remain a niche.
I personally have no problems with alternative schemes. If one works we will adapt. But the history of the last 50 years says they won't.
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.
