Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Real estate site Redfin files for IPO

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 317 posts

Re: Real estate site Redfin files for IPO

#301

Post by WWKong »

fizixer wrote: post #152
bkjelden wrote: post #12

I hope this company sees nothing but success. I bought my house through Redfin last year, and not only did I save ~$5k in commissions compared to a conventional realtor, I also felt the process was much smoother and more pleasant than other times I've interacted with a conventional realtor. It's simply absurd that in an era where any buyer can view photos of a house for sale online real estate agents still expect to…

Let me guess, that ~$5k is less than 1% of what you would pay in total. No offense (and sorry for being off-topic) but I never get how people obsess over the under 1 or 2% cost savings while completely ignoring the overvalued principal. Two other examples, - People go over to buy a $50-$70k car and later boast how "they made" the salesman give them a $500 or $1k discount. (well what about a fully-functioning $20k car…

You have not considered leverage in the equation.

Re: Real estate site Redfin files for IPO

#302

Post by everybodyknows »

1024core wrote: post #213

I like Redfin, but I have a couple of qualms with it: 1. They will tag a house as "hot" arbitrarily. The cynic in me thinks this tag is for sale. 2. They tend to hide information. I've seen houses come on the market, not sell for weeks, go out and then come back in the market for a lower price. But their "history" section does not list "price reduced"; they just pretend like the previous listing never existed. For ex…

>2. They tend to hide information. Redfin does this to comply with local MLS rules. Zillow does not, so best to check both.

Re: Real estate site Redfin files for IPO

#303

Post by hueving »

gist wrote: post #189
hueving wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't that real estate agents are offering the service, it's that you're pretty much forced into using it.

You are not 'forced' into using it. You can compile your own information of houses that may be for sale that aren't for sale and approach the owner directly and try to buy it. You can also approach people who had their houses listed that took them off the market and approach them after the listing expired. Think I am making this up? That is exactly what I did with one property that I bought. It was listed one year an…

People that are thinking about selling that don't have a listing will not usually give you a very good deal (e.g. "make me move" offers).

If you're not getting market or below market rate, there isn't much point in bypassing the agent.

Re: Real estate site Redfin files for IPO

#304

Post by Simon_says »

acdha wrote: post #168
Simon_says wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That fee could easily be 3-6 months salary. That's a hefty price to pay for culture and piece of mind.

Spread over a 30 year mortgage? I'm not saying it's nothing but many people really value peace of mind.

Is your argument that agents are so expensive that hiring them necessitates taking out a 30-year loan? That's not a great argument.

I don't think the time horizon of the mortgage is relevant. 3-month's income is 3-month's income.

Re: Real estate site Redfin files for IPO

#305

Post by acdha »

Simon_says wrote: post #304
acdha wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spread over a 30 year mortgage? I'm not saying it's nothing but many people really value peace of mind.

Is your argument that agents are so expensive that hiring them necessitates taking out a 30-year loan? That's not a great argument. I don't think the time horizon of the mortgage is relevant. 3-month's income is 3-month's income.

> I don't think the time horizon of the mortgage is relevant.

I think that view is less prevalent than it might seem. Many people look at this as one large purchase which they intend to use for decades, which involves a number of other upfront expenses but almost always also assumes significant tax savings and appreciation over that same time period.

I've heard plenty of people talk about that as just the price to pay for getting in on that long-term gain and clearly it hasn't caused that many people to not buy houses or bail to an alternative so far. One of the reasons for that seems to be that some people value having what they perceive as an expert representing them. I like RedFin – and had a great experience using them when I bought my current house – but it was interesting seeing how some people thought it was great when we mentioned that but others — generally but not exclusively older — were really scared that there was going to be some sort of unnoticed problem with the house[1] or a technicality which would cause the deal to fall through.

1. Yes, they knew this was replacing the realtor and not the inspector. No, that did not end the concern.

Re: Real estate site Redfin files for IPO

#306

Post by BadCookie »

ghughes wrote: post #235
BadCookie wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. When I needed to sell a house in the East Bay, the Redfin agent wanted to list the property for almost 20% less than it sold for. When I told her that I thought she was pricing it too low, she looked at me like I was crazy. The local agent that we ended up using instead (who had recently sold 3-5 houses in our same neighborhood) had a much better idea of what the house was actually worth, and also paid to sta…

> The local agent that we ended up using instead ... also paid to stage the house--which Redfin would not have done. You paid for that.

Yes, but it seems you've missed my main point entirely. If I had used Redfin, the house could have sold for $80-90k less than it otherwise did, whereas using the local agent cost me perhaps $5-6k more. The smaller point that I was making is that you often can't compare Redfin's fees to the local agent fees without also knowing if the local agent provides staging services, and many of them do. Granted, staging is only a couple thousand for a modest house (from what I understand), but it's something to be aware of.

Re: Real estate site Redfin files for IPO

#307

Post by BadCookie »

BadCookie wrote: post #306
ghughes wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The local agent that we ended up using instead ... also paid to stage the house--which Redfin would not have done. You paid for that.

Yes, but it seems you've missed my main point entirely. If I had used Redfin, the house could have sold for $80-90k less than it otherwise did, whereas using the local agent cost me perhaps $5-6k more. The smaller point that I was making is that you often can't compare Redfin's fees to the local agent fees without also knowing if the local agent provides staging services, and many of them do. Granted, staging is only…

I would guess that Redfin's problem is retaining talent. If an agent can make more money going off on their own, they likely will. The agent who helped us buy that house was amazing. But, guess what, he isn't at Redfin anymore. It's too bad. I love Redfin's site and want them to succeed, but perhaps they don't do enough to retain good agents (or their model financially prevents it). That's just a guess, though. Also, their agents may have to cover a larger geographic area than other agents, so it's not possible for them to be as intimately familiar with particular neighborhoods.

Re: Real estate site Redfin files for IPO

#308

Post by everybodyknows »

zaroth wrote: post #119
existencebox wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We got, unfortunately, MULTIPLE realtors through redfin; some on our own request, some when they simply would disappear from the company/stop answering our emails. There was neither quality nor consistency, and we had marginal ability to impact that choice on our own, whereas with a personal realtor we went with someone highly recommended from work peers. I absolutely agree the individual realtor impacts the experien…

I've never used a buyer's agent and always written into my offers that the 3% buyers agent fee is to go back to the seller (and of course adjust the top-line offer accordingly). I've never tried to buy in SF, but this strategy has always worked for me and saved a lot of money over the years. Frankly I can't understand the purpose of a buyers agent in this era, and taking 3% off the cost of a house is very substantial…

Another data point confirming your 1% as in line with seller's agent additional effort in handling buyer-side paperwork, communication et al. I just sold through a discount broker, independent and therefore free to set his own rates. His fee for buyers without their own agents: 1%. This was in Mountain View, California.

Re: Real estate site Redfin files for IPO

#309

Post by notyourday »

opo wrote: post #296
notyourday wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The contract you sign is literally thousands of pages of legalese that may or may not contradict everything else in it. The Real Estate Agents (REAs) give you 'cover' and smooth out all bumps. Joan knows Frank on XYZ council, therefore you'll never ever catch any flack. That's why you pay for real estate lawyer to go with you to closing. That's the only person qualified to help you. It is the only person who repres…

You paid for a lawyer to go with you to the closing? Did they point out anything you had missed? (I've never heard of anyone doing that.)

Yes. It was money well spent. One of the docs was changed.

Re: Real estate site Redfin files for IPO

#310

Post by notyourday »

gist wrote: post #189
hueving wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't that real estate agents are offering the service, it's that you're pretty much forced into using it.

You are not 'forced' into using it. You can compile your own information of houses that may be for sale that aren't for sale and approach the owner directly and try to buy it. You can also approach people who had their houses listed that took them off the market and approach them after the listing expired. Think I am making this up? That is exactly what I did with one property that I bought. It was listed one year an…

> You can compile your own information of houses that may be for sale that aren't for sale and approach the owner directly and try to buy it. You can also approach people who had their houses listed that took them off the market and approach them after the listing expired.

In some markets it is not possible due to what is known as "pocket listings".

Post reply on HN