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

After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 220 posts

Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission

#31

Post by intrasight »

I see this changing really fast. Real estate firms and individual real estate agents are not gonna want to get sued for hundreds of millions of dollars. They are going to be SUPER careful to avoid that. I foresee the quick dilution of the power of the realtor trademark. I foresee new real estate agents entering the market and not using the realtor trademark. I see those real estate agents using very different business models than what are use now. Lower percentages or fixed-price - but they'll find other ways to make money by being intermediaries with the other players in a transaction.

Whatever is our cost for this cartel, the cost of the MD cartel is at least 10x higher. So perspective is needed.

Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission

#32

Post by photonbeam »

koolba wrote: post #23
choppaface wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And title insurance

Of all the scams associated with real estate transactions, title insurance is kind of legitimate. The title chain itself may be recorded, but there may be some lien against the property that was not properly recorded. That’s the situation you protecting against. Now whether that’s worth .5-1% is debatable.

The seller really should be liable for all of that

Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission

#33

Post by pixl97 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #11
choppaface wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And title insurance

I feel like we have had electronic databases with backup capability for so long that errors in titles should have long been a thing that does not happen anymore.

I did computer support and had a couple of title companies all though the 2007 boom and 2008 crash. I may seem impossible, and yet suits brining up chain of title going back into the 1800s do happen more commonly than one would think.

In the rural south there are some insane claims of title across families. I've seen title work where they had thousands of pages of paperwork involved with hundreds of possible heirs that had to be located.

Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission

#34

Post by Libcat99 »

wyldfire wrote: post #25
sidlls wrote: post #2

Real estate sales is an industry rife with anti-competitive and corrupt practices. Appraisals, home inspections, lending, and sales are all in it together on this. I absolutely loathe them.

Home inspections aren't compulsory are they? I thought that they weren't even required by lenders. Of all the things listed they sure seem like real value to the buyer. If you're not borrowing to purchase a home you probably wouldn't need an appraisal. I think lenders just want objective evaluation of the collateral. Who can blame them?

Some lenders do require inspection, and FHA loans do require one. They have some value buyers for sure but inspectors also have an interest in finding something to make it seem worthwhile.

Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission

#35

Post by [deleted] »

akavi wrote: post #26
x86x87 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's mostly due to the fact that in order to list a house or find a house you need to use a system called MLS. In order to use the system you need to be a realtor. It's quite simple actually

But what's preventing realtors from defecting and offering their services for a lower rate?

[deleted]

Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission

#36

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

k2xl wrote: post #16

Ever since I bought my first house I have always hated the concept of realtors. Maybe before the internet it made sense because it wasn't easy finding houses. But what value does a realtor actually bring in the age of Zillow, Redfin, etc... Also - the percent structure has never made sense to me. Why should a realtor make more money just because the house is more expensive? Does a realtor really deserve to make 60k o…

I bought on short sale and my realtor made it happen. Made $180,000 when I sold that place.

Used the same realtor buying the next place, it was down to 8 people that put offers in on the only day showing. We got it because she knew a couple of tricks, one not exactly ethical.

She is a family friend and normal people would have got 1/2 the work from her.

A hardworking realtor can absolutely make a difference. Good luck finding one!

Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission

#37

Post by gpm »

calciphus wrote: post #14
lotsofpulp wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like we have had electronic databases with backup capability for so long that errors in titles should have long been a thing that does not happen anymore.

Same thought. You'd think title insurance would only kick in if the last title transfer predates say 1980, or some other relatively-likely-to-have-county-digital-records date

My parents bought a house in ~2003 new from the builder that ended up having a title issue when they tried to sell it (work orders of some kind)... in a big city that I certainly assume was using digital records by then.

Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission

#38

Post by ceejayoz »

ant6n wrote: post #12
mynameisash wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about lo-res, but the HDR images are always a big tell when I look at postings.

Tell of what?

That there's a reason they need the HDR to make it look better.

Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission

#39

Post by echelon »

photonbeam wrote: post #32
koolba wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of all the scams associated with real estate transactions, title insurance is kind of legitimate. The title chain itself may be recorded, but there may be some lien against the property that was not properly recorded. That’s the situation you protecting against. Now whether that’s worth .5-1% is debatable.

The seller really should be liable for all of that

They'll just pass the cost on to the buyer in the price.

Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission

#40

Post by gpm »

photonbeam wrote: post #32
koolba wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of all the scams associated with real estate transactions, title insurance is kind of legitimate. The title chain itself may be recorded, but there may be some lien against the property that was not properly recorded. That’s the situation you protecting against. Now whether that’s worth .5-1% is debatable.

The seller really should be liable for all of that

Yes, but if you only discover a decade later and the seller is long gone...
Post reply on HN