Live data from Hacker News

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

cnn.com

131–140 of 220 posts

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

#131
post #29
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The other agent won't bring clients to you if the cut is too low.

Yep. It's basically a cartel. You can do whatever you want technically. But you instantly lose the the market reach if you don't pay your realtor tax.

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

#132

This article reads as if hiring a person to help broker a deal worth several hundred thousand dollars on something as intimate as a house is silly when it's not. I don't use a travel agent to buy a $250 plane ticket because I know exactly what I want and I know exactly what I'm getting and there's not a third party involved (there's no seller of the seat, just the airline.) The realtor isn't there because you don't h…

My buy-side broker was phenomenal. But many aren’t. This should be negotiated, and the party to whom duty is owed should be paying the agent (and negotiating their fee).

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

#133
post #21

A good realtor can guide you through the market, inspections, and negotiation - all of which hugely affect the largest investment most people make. But that's no reason for them to demand a PERCENTAGE off the sale of the home! Closing fees plus realtor fees are a big reason why it takes so long for a home to break even for most people - something like 7 years in NYC. And one reason why there's so much pressure for ho…

People who routinely paid 20% to tip a waitress for a meal but don't want to pay a tip for someone who hugely affect the largest investment people make, This is just being cheap and rather foolish.

fine, but let's not compare meal cost to a house. that 6% is very arbitrary. i never got how selling a home in a major metropolitan area would require 10 times as much work for a realtor than a house in the middle of nowhere midwest for 200k. the flat percent doesn't make sense.

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

#134

Lots of people hating on realtors here, but my buying realtor: - Put up with me through several offers that fell through due to issues with the house - Met me quickly several times to see houses in a very hot market (covid) - Constantly found me homes that met my criteria - Was able to "get the dirt" on the homes and give me good advice for the homes that fell through, not pressuring me to buy And my selling realtor,…

Totally agree. Honestly reading through the comments they sound a lot like spectator comments: The naysayers don't really sound like they've really sold a house before or bought one either. There's even some commenters steering the conversation toward renting apartments.

Realtors really are awesome when you need to get from one house to another quickly and smoothly.

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

#135
post #22
post #19

I read the article, but I still don't understand how the National Association of Retailers enforce the 5-6% total commission. Does anyone know? The incidence question (is the fee "paid" by the buyer or seller) is a semantic one, but if the cartel is able to inflate the total fees, that's something else entirely.

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

There are a ton of websites that say it’s possible to create an MLS listing for a small fee, for a for sale by owner house.Are you suggesting there is some catch or that that is not actually possible?

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

#136

If a buyer’s agent gets any percentage of a sale, the buyer’s agent and the buyer have misaligned interests. They might ‘represent’ the buyer, but the buyer’s agent has the same economic incentives as the seller (higher price, faster sale, fewer contingencies).

Fundamentally you’re correct, but the much bigger incentive on BOTH sides is to close the deal quickly. If they spend twice the amount of time on the transaction, their earnings per hour get cut in half. That’s a much bigger impact then a few percentage points in price swings.

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

#137
post #121

when i came to the US the idea of a person making a commission on the sale of real estate was foreign to me. in my home country most ppl sell and buy real estate themselves. agents are used for special situations. when i tried to call an owner in the bay area to buy from them directly and offered to pay for any lawyer of their choice to have paperwork drafted and reviewed they pooped their pants. i never understood w…

[deleted]

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

#138
post #21

A good realtor can guide you through the market, inspections, and negotiation - all of which hugely affect the largest investment most people make. But that's no reason for them to demand a PERCENTAGE off the sale of the home! Closing fees plus realtor fees are a big reason why it takes so long for a home to break even for most people - something like 7 years in NYC. And one reason why there's so much pressure for ho…

People who routinely paid 20% to tip a waitress for a meal but don't want to pay a tip for someone who hugely affect the largest investment people make, This is just being cheap and rather foolish.

Most people are against tipping [1], but we are forced to because of societal pressure.

[1]https://www.bankrate.com/personal-finance/tipping-survey/

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

#139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's all great. And nobody's saying don't pay realtors for their work. They're saying, certainly don't pay them 6%, and preferably not a percentage at all. Just pay them like a contractor or anyone else you hire -- either a flat fee or by the hour, depending on the exact services.

I think they’d love to be paid a flat fee or by hour, regardless of whether the transaction goes through or not, just like restaurant staff being well paid and not rely on tip. But such is the commission world and have no idea how it all came to be this way.

It became this way because the industry intentionally rigged it this way through out-in-the-open collusion, via NAR and MLS rules.

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

#140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who routinely paid 20% to tip a waitress for a meal but don't want to pay a tip for someone who hugely affect the largest investment people make, This is just being cheap and rather foolish.

fine, but let's not compare meal cost to a house. that 6% is very arbitrary. i never got how selling a home in a major metropolitan area would require 10 times as much work for a realtor than a house in the middle of nowhere midwest for 200k. the flat percent doesn't make sense.

The same argument goes for buying steak versus buying a chicken meal. The costs are wildly different but the work is the same, why should I pay the waitress more for one versus the other?
Post reply on HN