Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you bring the buyer, have a heart to heart with your listing agent and ask if she will settle for the listing side of the commission and you repay all her marketing costs thus far. Why would she want to be greedy at this point when didn't do anything to secure the buyer except put up the sign. If it were me, I would rather have you on my side as a source of referrals than a business enemy for life.
If I were a better writer, I would have written exactly what you did Lynn.
It depends on what your listing contract says and what type of agency relationship you have with your agent. If the contract is an "Exclusive Right to Sell" then it doesn't matter who brings the buyer to the table.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverfall
What gbone said.
Ditto here. Plus you're still going to need representation through negotiations and closing - that's when the real work comes in.
Hmmm. I don't think here you can be their 'agent' as in buyer agent for your own property. You do have to reveal you are a licensed real estate holder regardless of who you are dealing with and I believe you can be a transaction broker, but what would be the point? As the seller, you can do all the paperwork and make what ever arrangements need to be made but you don't have to do that with any representation of the buyer...you're just 'assisting' getting things done. No?
Ditto here. Plus you're still going to need representation through negotiations and closing - that's when the real work comes in.
Any other agents agree / disagree with the "real work" of a listing agent coming from contract to close? (shout out to the agents who recently disagreed with this position in another thread.)
It seems that we have some agents who promote the indispensable value of listing agents in the contract-to-close phase, and others who say listing agents have essentially earned their full commission by listing the property.
Any other agents agree / disagree with the "real work" of a listing agent coming from contract to close? (shout out to the agents who recently disagreed with this position in another thread.)
It seems that we have some agents who promote the indispensable value of listing agents in the contract-to-close phase, and others who say listing agents have essentially earned their full commission by listing the property.
You called?
I disagree that the real work of a listing agent is from contract to close...Most of a listing agents work is from listing to offer.
I think where the "contract to close" jargon has come from is the fact that real estate information is so easily accessed online. I think it is another way to "justify" having a real estate agent. The fact is, I think this phrase does the exact opposite and devalues how time consuming and challenging it can be to market properties. I just did two CMA's for unique properties and spent so much time on them. I at minimum drove by every comp, and when feasible went into the ones I had not been in before. I personally dislike the contract to close language because it demans and devalues the intense effort I try and put forth on my CMA's and marketing of homes.
I personally would steer clear of a listing agent that thinks that "contract to close" is where the real work is. The good news is, you just gave me a blog topic
TomOCox, a buyer agent cannot represent the buyer in the sale of their own property in SC, doubt they can anywhere. Goes back to representing the buyers best interest and a conflict of interest if the agent owns or has a financial stake in the property. The broker may adjust the commission, they may not but you can ask.
In Illinois, the agent has to disclose their interest in the home for sale. There are no restrictions on dual agency provided the buyer agrees, upfront.
Any other agents agree / disagree with the "real work" of a listing agent coming from contract to close? (shout out to the agents who recently disagreed with this position in another thread.)
It seems that we have some agents who promote the indispensable value of listing agents in the contract-to-close phase, and others who say listing agents have essentially earned their full commission by listing the property.
From my standpoint, the primary purposes of agency include consumer education on how markets work, exposure ( listing side) and negotiation.
I will however, add that in this market, holding the transaction together is increasingly challenging. In a declining market, inspection issues are negotiated with the seller who so often already feels beaten down by the market ( translation: hates the buyer and/or buyer's agent) to appraisal issues.
Not being an agent myself, I appreciate hearing from Silverfall and MAM - two of my 3 favorite brokers/agents on CD (where are you DMenscha?) - to describe where you see your value arising.
I have to say that it fits well into my existing opinion to see you two give slightly different answers. I think part of the reason for that is probably due to the fact that different clients need more help with different aspects of the transaction. Personally, I get the most value from agents in their capacity as market experts - advising on marketing strategies, valuations, the competition, etc. But that's probably because my background has prepared me to handle the contract, negotiations and closing. The needs of other clients might be reversed.
But do you really need any more complicated analysis than that to prove that the market (i.e. your clients) would love to have more choices as to how to structure the relationship and fees? If you can save time and effort in transactions where the customer handles work that you otherwise would, I'd think it would be a no brainer to offer different fee structures. Not that you'd necessarily have to give the client 100% credit for the time they saved you.
For example, if the pre-contract work could be said to generally comprise, say, 70% of your work, and a client was willing to do all of the contract-to-close work, wouldn't agents come out ahead by discounting their commissions down to, say 75%, and then handing off 30% of the work to the client? Seems to me you just juiced your ROI by 5%. The only justification I can see to not go that route is because you lose control of the transaction.
Is that it, or what am I missing?
(And please don't tell me those options are already out there. I know that. But I also know they are not as common as "full service" agents, many of whom deride anything less.)
I disagree that the real work of a listing agent is from contract to close...Most of a listing agents work is from listing to offer.
I think where the "contract to close" jargon has come from is the fact that real estate information is so easily accessed online. I think it is another way to "justify" having a real estate agent. The fact is, I think this phrase does the exact opposite and devalues how time consuming and challenging it can be to market properties. I just did two CMA's for unique properties and spent so much time on them. I at minimum drove by every comp, and when feasible went into the ones I had not been in before. I personally dislike the contract to close language because it demans and devalues the intense effort I try and put forth on my CMA's and marketing of homes.
I personally would steer clear of a listing agent that thinks that "contract to close" is where the real work is. The good news is, you just gave me a blog topic
SF I just wanted to clarify my statement - this was a property that had only been on the market for 3 weeks. I apologize, as my post was never intended to imply that what you and others mentioned was not right on target. There is a lot more work involved as a LA.
We, as well, do a ton of marketing, previewing other comps (we don't even have MLS here) and do a ton of legwork on behalf of our sellers. I guess the point I was trying to make to OP was that just because after 3 weeks on the market and she then had a neighbor want to buy the house, that she still needed representation during the offer, negotiation, inspections, etc. etc. etc. through a sucessful closing; which is a lot of work.
I guess I just kind-of cut to the chase in this situation that OP still needed representation through the closing which again is a lot of work. I type almost 90wpm so sometimes my posts are like 'novels' so I just wanted to point out that representation through all of the other aspects was still needed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
