JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,459
- 854
- 126
:thumbsdown::thumbsdown::thumbsdown: This is how she makes her living. How about when your next review comes up if your boss asks you for 20% of your salary back?
:thumbsdown::thumbsdown::thumbsdown: This is how she makes her living. How about when your next review comes up if your boss asks you for 20% of your salary back?
Terrible way to look at it. It's more like having a job but outsourcing 90% of your work and only giving up 50% of what you make.
mugs
Lifer
- Apr 29, 2003
- 48,924
- 45
- 91
My understanding is that if the OP doesn't use a realtor, the seller's agent will just get the full commission. He won't be able to use it as a bargaining chip, because the end result for the seller is the same commission. Buy using a realtor and getting part of their commission, he saves some money.
Don't let those in here that got taken get you down or even doubting yourself. Everything is a negotiation when it is a service that is being provided and even when it is goods in a lot of cases.
You are doing what most in this country either don't know you can do or aren't smart enough to figure out.....you don't have to pay someone money they didn't earn just because others think that it is required or the "right thing to do".
You are doing what most in this country either don't know you can do or aren't smart enough to figure out.....you don't have to pay someone money they didn't earn just because others think that it is required or the "right thing to do".
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,459
- 854
- 126
That's a load of crap and you know it, Jules. She'll spend less than an hour in negotiations (on behalf of the seller I might add) and probably will spend an hour at closing. And you think she deserves how much? Come on...
50/50 is more than fair.
KK
Lifer
- Jan 2, 2001
- 15,903
- 4
- 81
If he's buying without a realtor on his behalf, then the burden of paying for the realtor would fall on the seller. Wouldn't if someone is listing a house for 200k that they would know that out of the settlement they'll only get 188k. Thus the buyer would have no right to any of the sellers moneys. That's the way I would think the process would go, I could be wrong.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,459
- 854
- 126
Your assumption is wrong. If I was a buyer, I would want a piece of this "gravy" account.
You clearly are biased because you are married to a real estate agent.
It's a buyer's agent moron. Obviously you are familiar with the business so tell us all the stuff a buyer's agent does. As you list we can check of most of the leg work as already having been done by the OP. Then you tell me who deserves all the money.
Also, come on with that lame analogy, like someone else said if someone did 70-80% of my job I would gladly take a 20% pay cut.
And to thsoe saying don't use an agent, the seller is going to pay ~6% commission to the selling real estate agent no matter what. Out of that 6% the selling agent will pay ~3% to the buying agent (if there is one). So not getting a buying agent doesn't save the buyer or the seller any money, only the seller's agent.
Please correct me if I am wrong about the last point.
kranky
Elite Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 21,014
- 137
- 106
I think a more accurate analogy would be if my boss said, "This week I'll pay you 20% less than usual, but you only have to work Monday morning." I'm pretty sure I'd take that deal.
It's not permanent, it's for one transaction. It's clearly a lot less work than would be required for the typical realtor trying to find a home for a buyer.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,459
- 854
- 126
A buyers agent will spend a lot of time researching properties and driving clients around to see them sometimes the same properties 2 or 3 times. It's a lot of work with the possibility of no payoff in the end. The buyers agent is bringing in the buyer. Without a buyer you have no transaction you jackass.
Sometimes you get lucky and a transaction goes relatively smoothly and other times you really have to work a lot and deal with a ton of sh!t to get a deal to close. There's a big difference between a good real estate agent and a bad one. The good ones are worth the money.
You don't agree with my opinion so you resort to personal attacks? He asked for opinions so I gave mine. Don't like it? Too bad. :|
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,415
- 14,305
- 136
I don't see how you're being a cheapskate. You're negotiating for business. The realtor can take it or leave it. Nothing wrong with that.
The only issue I see, and I can't believe this hasn't been brought up yet, is that as the buyer you can't legally structure the deal the way you're describing it. The realtors are paid by the seller. For escrow/attorney to represent a portion of the seller-paid realtor commission going to you, the buyer, would make it a kickback.
Maybe therein lies the issue? You'll need to restructure it. The purchase agreement should represent that the seller is paying a reduced commission (no need to mention that it's actually reduced though) and then have the seller pay up to that reduced amount of your mortgage closing costs (if you're getting a low-cost mortgage, then use it to buy down your rate or pay for your recurring costs like taxes and insurance).
If I was a realtor, I'd happily take this deal provided you were as cooperative throughout the rest of the transaction as you were in finding the property.
The only issue I see, and I can't believe this hasn't been brought up yet, is that as the buyer you can't legally structure the deal the way you're describing it. The realtors are paid by the seller. For escrow/attorney to represent a portion of the seller-paid realtor commission going to you, the buyer, would make it a kickback.
Maybe therein lies the issue? You'll need to restructure it. The purchase agreement should represent that the seller is paying a reduced commission (no need to mention that it's actually reduced though) and then have the seller pay up to that reduced amount of your mortgage closing costs (if you're getting a low-cost mortgage, then use it to buy down your rate or pay for your recurring costs like taxes and insurance).
If I was a realtor, I'd happily take this deal provided you were as cooperative throughout the rest of the transaction as you were in finding the property.
Dirigible
Diamond Member
- Apr 26, 2006
- 5,960
- 30
- 91
Realtors aren't entitled to earn a living. They try to make a living, like anyone else. Their market is changing, and who knows if that profession will survive. It's the reality of the market economy.
Realtors try to win clients. One area where competition is increasing is price. Just because this wasn't the case in the past doesn't mean it won't be true in the future. Sure it's tough for realtors and many may have to switch careers. This is not the first or last profession to be hit by such things.
Why should realtors be entitled to the same commission they've always gotten? Why are they immune to price competition? Why are they different from other people with other jobs, many of which have been outsourced or paid much less? They're not. Price pressure on realtors is here and they'll have to adapt, and possibly leave the field.
i know when i got my home, my realtor did a ton of work for 4 months or so. it was an ongoing process. i think she deserved her commission. but in your case, i think asking for 20% is more than fair.
you also have to think that in case you don't get the house. inspections find huge problems, financing issues, etc. then she may have to start looking for a house for you.
you also have to think that in case you don't get the house. inspections find huge problems, financing issues, etc. then she may have to start looking for a house for you.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,459
- 854
- 126
How many people want to try to sell their home themselves? Or so the research themselves? Or handle the paperwork themselves?
Yes, the market has changed but I don't think it's changed that much and it's leaning back to favor traditional realtors here at the moment. 6% commissions are more common now in this buyer's market than they were even a year ago. There is a Help-U-Sell office that sprang up about 2 years ago in my area that is closing because they can't afford to sit on properties for the 4-6 months it takes to sell a house with that business model.
If you want a decent realtor you're not going to find one by cutting commissions.
My issue with Realtors (one step above used car salesmen) is 20 yrs ago they got 3% for acting as the buyer's agent/seller's agent. This was essentially their salary. In the last 20 years property values have quadrupled in most cases. Yet the real estate agent still makes 3%, in those same 20 yrs did the job get 4x harder? did for sale signs increase in price 4x? With the advent of computers, online listings have made their jobs tons easier. Forms are a thousand times easier now.
In Oregon, it is illegal for an agent to give a rebate. Scammers. Scumbags.
In Oregon, it is illegal for an agent to give a rebate. Scammers. Scumbags.
Dirigible
Diamond Member
- Apr 26, 2006
- 5,960
- 30
- 91
Hey, if realtors can get that commission, more power to 'em.
I just don't think it's being a douche to try to lower the commissions. Especially since the OP could get that lower commission from ziprealty. If the realtor insisted on full commission I hope they could provide some service superior to that provided by zip. Otherwise they'd just be asking the OP to give them money out of his pocket for no reason.
My company regularly compares what they pay me to what they'd have to pay to have my work outsourced. If it were cheaper to outsource, I'd be fired. Friends at my company have been fired after such reviews. That's reality. I don't think it's right that realtors be immune from price pressure, and don't think it's a dick move to look for a better deal.
Interesting what you say about the discount places near you having trouble. The traditional realtor structure may win out in such a market. Around here houses still sell within a couple weeks, usually with multiple bids and frequently at large premiums over asking, and the discount places seem to be making big inroads.
Dirigible
Diamond Member
- Apr 26, 2006
- 5,960
- 30
- 91
I think a more appropriate term for agents would be "effective lobbyists."
Under our system of government it makes sense for them to try such self-serving lobbying. The politicians who put that law on the books are the ones I might call the scumbags.
(Caveat: I have no knowledge of the law in question, but have jumped to the conclusion that it stifles price competition and its potential benefits to all for the benefit of a small group of constituents with an organized and effective lobby.)
you aint getting $4k, most agent get 25% of the commission under normal real estate commission pay structure, by the time your agent got the commission, its peanuts. if you want 20%/80%, and thinking you will get $4k, you are sadly mistaken. You need to buy a house that is over 1.2million at 6% commission to get your $4k. I am a realtor, are you in MA?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter