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

Zillow CEO: startups trying to disrupt real estate commissions will fail (2012)

geekwire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 329 posts

Re: Zillow CEO: startups trying to disrupt real estate commissions will fail (2012)

#101

Post by prepend »

hash872 wrote: post #59
megaman8 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not having a realtor as a buyer really helps, because you can add that 3% to the purchase price of the house saving you 3% which can be a huge amount in expensive markets like the bay area.

Not in any way a defender of the current real estate system, but I've never understood this mindset. It presupposes completely irrational behavior on the part of the seller- that they will choose to give you a 3% discount for.... no reason at all? Rational agents want to get as much money as they can for their homes, and begrudgingly pay any fees that they are forced to. If the seller gave you a 3% discount here for…

In IRL when I bought my house I factored in 3% to the buyer’s agent. I had offers from normal agents who get 3%, all manner of “kickback” agents who collect 3% and give some back to the buyer, and one agent less buyer that included an explicit 3% calculation in their offer.

While, sure, I would love to get more and pay less commission, I don’t care how that 3% is distributed. It’s fixed part of the transaction and is in the MLS listing because I was afraid of missing some buyers.

When I bought a house, my contract with my buying agent said that 50% of the buying commission came back to me at closing as a prepaid closing cost.

Re: Zillow CEO: startups trying to disrupt real estate commissions will fail (2012)

#102

Post by mediaman »

picodguyo wrote: post #97

I've bought and sold on separate occasions through Redfin and saw no difference between their service for 1% and my previous transactions with a traditional realtor for 5%. They both took me around to see properties, provided neighborhood and property insights, acted as my negotiating proxy, and guided the closing process. I don't understand how Redfin can charge so little, but as it stands today I wouldn't dream of…

Redfin charges 1% for selling the house. They still pay 3% to the buyer's broker. The total fee is therefore 4%, versus the normal 6%, where both sides get 3%.

Re: Zillow CEO: startups trying to disrupt real estate commissions will fail (2012)

#103

Post by iwantedjusttom »

general8bitso wrote: post #17
ilamont wrote: post #2

That's a bold statement. Still, the NAR has data that suggests realtors are more likely to be involved in transactions than 18 years ago: 87% of buyers purchased their home through a real estate agent or broker—a share that has steadily increased from 69 percent in 2001. Source: National Association of Realtors ( https://www.nar.realtor/research-and-statistics/quick-real-e... ) ... But I'm curious if the definition o…

Well, until they coordinate to change laws at the state and federal laws, facilitating real estate transactions as a non-realtor will expose such individuals to legal action. Kinda like Tesla trying to sell in states that require a franchise dealership. Also, the term commission is ambiguous in the context of the headline. Do we mean a percentage of sales or an officiating body that controls an MLS or something at th…

this is not completely true because a seller can negotiate on behalf of themselves for their own home and a buyer can negotiate for themselves as well. Which I suppose is obvious.

You can also have an attorney negotiate for you, at least in my state, and attorneys only charge a flat fee for handling a transaction in my area. A small percentage of what it costs to use an actual realtor.

Re: Zillow CEO: startups trying to disrupt real estate commissions will fail (2012)

#104

Post by [deleted] »

ams6110 wrote: post #67
sauwan wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is pretty misguided. 3% of $100,000 is $3,000. Many housing purchases will be more than that, but let's just talk over $3k. Some people will be very comfortable with dealing with negotiations, pricing their house (the quasi-ethical can even talk to a few realtors before hand to get their opinion), and doing the paper legwork. Just because someone chooses to use their time and effort rather than forking o…

When you're buying, a realtor will never tell you that you are overpaying -- it would be less commission for them and greater chance the seller will reject or counter the offer which creates more work for them. When you're selling, they will always tell you that you are priced too high. They want a quick sale with minimal work. I've used realtors on the buy and sell side of the first house I owned. I was disappointed…

[deleted]

Re: Zillow CEO: startups trying to disrupt real estate commissions will fail (2012)

#105

Post by gamechangr »

ams6110 wrote: post #67
sauwan wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is pretty misguided. 3% of $100,000 is $3,000. Many housing purchases will be more than that, but let's just talk over $3k. Some people will be very comfortable with dealing with negotiations, pricing their house (the quasi-ethical can even talk to a few realtors before hand to get their opinion), and doing the paper legwork. Just because someone chooses to use their time and effort rather than forking o…

When you're buying, a realtor will never tell you that you are overpaying -- it would be less commission for them and greater chance the seller will reject or counter the offer which creates more work for them. When you're selling, they will always tell you that you are priced too high. They want a quick sale with minimal work. I've used realtors on the buy and sell side of the first house I owned. I was disappointed…

>I've bought and sold two other homes FSBO since then, and the process was much easier

Respectfully, I'm curious... How would doing it yourself be easier?

Re: Zillow CEO: startups trying to disrupt real estate commissions will fail (2012)

#106

Post by linsomniac »

ams6110 wrote: post #90
clairity wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "That being said, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) and their local branches are the definition of a cartel." NAR was actually investigated by the federal government (FTC i think? ), who concluded much the same, but lobbying buried the report and nothing came of it. MLS's maintain power by strictly controlling access to information. they have the most up-to-date and the most detailed information about prop…

Property transfers, including buyer, seller, and sales price, are public record. It's all published in the newspaper. How can MLS control access to that information? Is it just that nobody else bothers to compile it from the county records?

As others have mentioned, that is after the property has sold. If you are looking to buy a house, that information is not going to help you. However, even for sold information, depending on the county you are in, those public records aren't always accurate. I don't know how frequent that is, but I suggested using public records when we lost access to MLS data a few years ago, and a coworker said they had problems with that data from some counties in the past.

If you are buying a house, the MLS is the place you need to go. And that is mediated by a Realtor or Broker in most cases.

Re: Zillow CEO: startups trying to disrupt real estate commissions will fail (2012)

#107

Post by prepend »

ams6110 wrote: post #67
sauwan wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is pretty misguided. 3% of $100,000 is $3,000. Many housing purchases will be more than that, but let's just talk over $3k. Some people will be very comfortable with dealing with negotiations, pricing their house (the quasi-ethical can even talk to a few realtors before hand to get their opinion), and doing the paper legwork. Just because someone chooses to use their time and effort rather than forking o…

When you're buying, a realtor will never tell you that you are overpaying -- it would be less commission for them and greater chance the seller will reject or counter the offer which creates more work for them. When you're selling, they will always tell you that you are priced too high. They want a quick sale with minimal work. I've used realtors on the buy and sell side of the first house I owned. I was disappointed…

I disagree a bit as when you’re buying the realtor doesn’t care which home you buy. So the incentive seems to demonstrate max value to you.

I think a realtor is not incentived to get you the best price once you select a home and are in negotiation because a few thousand doesn’t matter if the deal is skunked.

I’ve bought 3 properties and every time my realtor was really good about showing value and basis for valuation on tons of houses before we visited or offered.

I think it’s very different for selling because you only have one house to sell.

Re: Zillow CEO: startups trying to disrupt real estate commissions will fail (2012)

#108

Post by iwantedjusttom »

megaman8 wrote: post #18
brightball wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a essentially a giant network effect. Practically, the #1 reason to use a realtor is that if there is an issue with the home that should have been known ahead of time, there is a chain of insured entities that provides legal recourse. The shop and decide part is secondary to their value, but that is how they are so entrenched. The local MLS in any given area has the ability to cut off access to anyone. Some are…

Not having a realtor as a buyer really helps, because you can add that 3% to the purchase price of the house saving you 3% which can be a huge amount in expensive markets like the bay area.

in most cases the seller has already agreed to pay 6% to the agent for the sale of their home - then that selling agent agrees to split it with the agent that brings a buyer. If you come in off the sign you're basically handing the seller's agent another 3% commission - even if you "negotiate" 3% off the top of the house the seller is still paying that 3% to the listing agent.

In the eyes of the buyer it might not matter if you got your 3% off... but that seller probably isn't saving any money on his/her end.

Re: Zillow CEO: startups trying to disrupt real estate commissions will fail (2012)

#110

Post by amatai »

IMO, agents are not almost always not acting in buyer's interest. The percentage based commission is twisted in getting the buyer to bid for as much as they can pull.

So, realtors at least for buyers, not such a great value, other than getting you access to lock box to view a property.

Post reply on HN