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
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?
After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission
151–160 of 220 posts
Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission
#152Lina Khan, what are you waiting for? Do the realtors need to start making mean tweets before you will take action?
[1] https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/topics/competition-enforceme...
Fun fact: NAR was the top lobbying spender in 2020 with $84B. Second place was Chamber of Commerce at $82B. Third place was $26B, or less than one third of NAR's spend.
https://infogram.com/1pyy66emdxryq1c3yez9wqvxp2by3p7pgn3
I only saw those stats recently but felt realtors are likely a very vocal and substantial constituency for every representative.
Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission
#153Earlier 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.
> Of all the scams associated with real estate transactions, title insurance is kind of legitimate As someone who has submitted (and failed to collect) on a claim against title insurance for legal fees incurred to correct a mistake in the original title that the title company missed, I'm skeptical of its value, at least for things like erroneous lot lines.
Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission
#154Ever 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 luc…
There doesn't seem to be any luck available.
Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission
#155I 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 busines…
Seller's agents will get paid a flat rate, then X% commission for just the amount above some certain price. Basically they'll be rewarded if (and only if) they can successfully create a bidding war that sells the place for more than it's probably worth. If they're just doing their normal job of selling the thing for the appropriate amount, they'll get their flat rate.
Buyer's agents will be paid per hour of work, like lawyers.
Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Of all the scams associated with real estate transactions, title insurance is kind of legitimate As someone who has submitted (and failed to collect) on a claim against title insurance for legal fees incurred to correct a mistake in the original title that the title company missed, I'm skeptical of its value, at least for things like erroneous lot lines.
What was their reasoning for not paying out?
They claimed that the seller misrepresented the property by claiming it came with a parking spot.
Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
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...
The core problem of the lien is solved, the only thing left is to ensure the lawyers who seem to always get their cake no matter what aren't bloodthirsty enough.
Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission
#158I 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.
Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
The realtor I used to buy my last house does it as a hobby. She also did one of the most ethical things I have ever seen, and only took her commission at our initial offer, she wouldn't take commission on any of the escalation clause raises.
Why is that ethical? It seems neutral.
Re: After a $1.8B verdict, the clock is ticking on the 6% realtor commission
#160Ever 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…
Where it gets sketchy is when those agents are friends with each other. A lot of deals get made before the property is even listed online. So, what my parents experienced was that they were quoted valuations of their property that had about a 20% bandwidth. 20% is a lot. Nearly 100K euros in this case They went with the highest valuation in the end. It sold within a week slightly above what they asked. This is normal in the Dutch market currently. Prices briefly dipped last year and then continued growing. Even the increased interest of mortgages has so far not changed that.
So, what was going on with those other agents deliberately low balling the price?
The interests of agents are not always aligned with their clients. They are either working for the buyer or seller. And they do each other favors. Like letting each other know when something hot (i.e. priced below market value) comes up for sale or convincing a seller to agree to a lower valuation. So, there are conflicts of interest. And sometimes they just need the money and getting the property sold quickly is worth more to them than having to put in work to sell at a higher price. Another factor is that when property comes back on the market, the same agents are often involved. So, there's a bit of double dipping happening there. Help a client buy cheap, and a few years later help them sell expensive. In a market with ever growing real estate prices that's the game.