Originally posted by: flot
Ok, a couple of comments on the above post. Firstly, I should point out that my parents are realtors (with Assist-2-Sell, which I believe is similar but not entirely like help-u-sell, (despite the names). It is a flat fee based system -or- a commission based system with MLS insertion, whichever the seller chooses. (in either case, cheaper than what they would pay most realtors, and in either case, no less service by any means)
1. It isn't necessarily that easy to become a realtor. In florida, it isn't even that easy to become an agent. In FL, you have to take a week long class and then pass a test, and then you have to work for a realtor for a year before you can do all that over again to become an actual broker. <-- I know this because I've started the process, not necessarily to pursue as a career but just for the knowledge and experience
2. In almost all cases, yes, absolutely, listing your house in the MLS will result in more exposure to the market and potentially a higher sales price.
3. Your math is wrong. If she sold the property at $510,000 and charged a 5.5% comission, then the seller paid $28,000 in comissions to the brokers. I don't know how help-u-sell's fee structure works, but as a "for instance" the way my parents do it, that $489,000 house would have had a flat $5995 comission. In other words, the difference was $3000 in the seller's pocket - certainly not negligable but not the $20,000 difference you mentioned above. Also for the record I think my parents' office sells about 50% of their properties via private (flat fee) listings, and the other 50% through the MLS. Their office is also responsible a _significant_ percentage of their areas sales, despite having substantially fewer employees than most of the other local firms.
4. There is nothing *wrong* with going FSBO. Lots of people do it. However, the money you think you may save is often lost by the lack of exposure your property gets. And as you've discovered, the answer for exposure is to list in the MLS, which then means the buyer's agent wants his comission. I don't have any issue at all with the original poster wanting to sell his own house - just think it's a shame to perpetuate the "realtors are bad" stereotype.
5. Last but not least, I entirely agree with the original poster that the seller's agent 3% fee is absurd. Buyer's agents, sometimes yes sometimes no. For instance, a friend of mine bought a house and his realtor showed them 35+ properties over a span of weeks. That's a lot of time and legwork. Considering that the person showing them houses was a junior agent for a big firm, they probably only saw 1.5% of that comission. So on his $200,000 house - the agent may have only gotten $3000 for spending the better part of a month driving them around town. Subtract taxes etc and that means that money in his pocket was closer to $2000. That's a good salary but nothing "amazing" when you consider that many agents may only get 1-2 sales a month. As a for instance, I had a buyer's agent of my own when I was looking at condos a couple years back, and I spent a good 3 days of his time, at no cost to me, looked at a dozen properties and then told him "thanks but I didn't see what I was looking for, so I'm going to go back to renting for another year." So much of the comission they make on sales goes to balance out all the "browsers" that cost them a lot of time and effort.
6. For the original poster, I don't know what you expected out of your realtor. It is a business transaction, and as soon as your name is on the dotted line, that transaction is over. In some cases it could actually be seen as illegal or at the very least unethical for that realtor to have done as little as give you a $100 home depot gift card. (that would effectively be a kickback to you, which your mortgage company, the state, the realtor's board, etc, could very well frown upon)
Facebook
Twitter