41–50 of 344 posts
I couldn't buy a house without a realtor even though its a house that found myself and was paying 100% cash. 3%-3% is a lot of money if I don't use any service from a realtor.
What prevented you from buying it yourself?
Good! I find realtors to be parasites. We sold my wife’s house FSBO, which was not hard at all. My mother just bought a house also FSBO. No parasites involved, and everyone comes out the better. You can always get a real estate lawyer to bless everything.
Where you stand really depends on where you sit. My wife recently became an agent, and prior to that I was all about disrupting the industry. But I’ve come to see the 3% on each side as an almost market clearing price. It’s really hard work, with low barriers to entry, and significant upfront costs. In a tight market, being a buyers agent can be a blessing or a curse. She’s been working with one client for nearly a y…
I’ll also add value I’ve seen she adds from a buyers perspective: -she has access to a lot of off market listings via her networks. Sellers will somethings keep things off market so that when they sell, the tax base stays relatively the same - the appraisers don’t see a sale in the official pipeline -my wife also is really good at sending bespoke letters to target homes of folks not yet willing to sell. She’ll ID a g…
huh? tax appraisals are based on recent sold values.. not MSRP pending. You have to record the sale with the county to transfer the property so there's no way to escape the ta x man.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having a real estate agent as a buyer can be extremely useful. Time savings: they'll actively search out properties that fit your needs, handle negotiations, schedule inspections and work with the city or county, etc. They're also experienced with all of the legal aspects, and work with mortgage and insurance companies. "Tech Bros" have a stereotype of thinking they can do everything themselves. Sometimes they should…
The tech bros are right about searching out and notifying you about properties, computers do just fine at that. As far as title, legal, etc, certainly something best left to a professional. But it should be fee based, not 6% of the value of the asset.
Where you stand really depends on where you sit. My wife recently became an agent, and prior to that I was all about disrupting the industry. But I’ve come to see the 3% on each side as an almost market clearing price. It’s really hard work, with low barriers to entry, and significant upfront costs. In a tight market, being a buyers agent can be a blessing or a curse. She’s been working with one client for nearly a y…
It should not be a percentage, it should be a fixed rate. A few thousand dollars. Or hourly.
Until people can set different rates, or you have the option of fixed rates if that is the preference of agent & buyer it won't be honest.
It blows my mind that the fees are percentage based. The amount of work required for an agent on a 100K house is very similar to that of a 2 Mill house. Presumably the seller agent wishes to get compensation for increasing the value of the house, but for both the seller and buyer agents, the number of deals done far outweighs slight incremental selling prices. In which case, both would prefer to settle on a lower pri…
I'm not sure where I fall on what a real-estate agent's cut should be for selling a house. But for the buyer's agent, it's really over-valued IMO. And why should a buyer's agent in San Jose make 4x more than somebody in Des Moines for the exact same value-add?
When I bought my house, my Realtor found some good listings, arranged viewings, did the paperwork, and set everything up for me. All useful services, and worth paying for. But was it worth $12k for less than 40 hours of total work? I don't think so. That's a higher hourly rate than I'd be charged by a good doctor. And my house was a pretty cheap one by modern standards. Those are monopoly prices charged by people who know they've got you over a barrel.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having a real estate agent as a buyer can be extremely useful. Time savings: they'll actively search out properties that fit your needs, handle negotiations, schedule inspections and work with the city or county, etc. They're also experienced with all of the legal aspects, and work with mortgage and insurance companies. "Tech Bros" have a stereotype of thinking they can do everything themselves. Sometimes they should…
The tech bros are right about searching out and notifying you about properties, computers do just fine at that. As far as title, legal, etc, certainly something best left to a professional. But it should be fee based, not 6% of the value of the asset.
In the sale side tho, id be willing to use an agent to try and push my sale above market price, make them do the leg work. If it takes 100 days of concentrated effort then yea, they earned their 6% imo
Where you stand really depends on where you sit. My wife recently became an agent, and prior to that I was all about disrupting the industry. But I’ve come to see the 3% on each side as an almost market clearing price. It’s really hard work, with low barriers to entry, and significant upfront costs. In a tight market, being a buyers agent can be a blessing or a curse. She’s been working with one client for nearly a y…
I'm sure in a healthy housing market, working with a great agent can easily make you more than their commission when it comes to pricing strategy.