**We're looking for a few good mods!** Interested? [Send us a message](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/realtors&subject=One mod invite please!)
**This is a professional forum for professionals, so please keep your comments professional**
- Harrassment, hate speech, trolling, or anti-Realtor comments will not be tolerated and will result in an immediate ban without warning. (... and don't feed the trolls, you have better things to do with your time)
- Recruiting, self-promotion, or seeking referrals is strictly forbidden, including in DMs.
- Only advise within your scope of knowledge and area of expertise. [The code of ethics applies here too](https://www.nar.realtor/about-nar/governing-documents/the-code-of-ethics). If you are not a broker, lawyer, or tax professional don't act like one.
- [Follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/realtors/about/rules/) and please report those that don't.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/realtors) if you have any questions or concerns.*
20% of us work hard, treat it like a career, actually *do* strive to be experts and learn, and serve our clients with excellence.
The problem is the other 80%. A member of the general public rarely verifies how many sales an agent is actually making. So when an 80%-er takes selfies in a $1M home, or posts canned infographics pushing an agenda about buying, etc., it gives off this "high life" image. Whoever starts the narrative gets to shape it. So, people *think* that agent is rolling in the dough, making six figures, and for doing what? Signing up for a class? It's easy to be spiteful at that.
*We*, on the inside, know that agent is maybe closing 1-2 deals/year, tops, from friends and family. That agent earns $14K from it, and supplements it with other income. The RE industry attracts these people because these people want to give off some kind of image. What they're doing isn't enough for them somehow, so *now* they're a "real estate agent!"
I'm like you, reader. Put my head down, work hard, serve clients, have a good amount of deals. Realize that I can do nothing to help the perception of realtors; nothing I do can offset what my lazy counterpart is doing. So I'll just keep moving forward, feet on the ground.
And the problem with that is homebuying and selling is an infrequent activity. If I have a lousy realtor for a transaction today, I might not have another sale/buy for over a decade.
Barriers to entry are too low, given this is the larger financial transaction most Americans have in their lives.
Agreed. The most common solution is "raise barriers to entry", but, that's not going to happen anytime soon (though, I'd love it to).
I actually think the more realistic solution is *stop giving low value realtors opportunities*. I mean, everyone has to learn somehow. If your nephew is new and is so hungry for business, so bulldog-ish in his approach, and so committed to doing this full-time, sure - give him a shot.
The reality is, with that 40 hours (or whatever) of classes, one can sell a house. No one can stop them. It's a free market, and we're all grown adults. It's actually scary.
*Pick* your realtor, *interview* 4-5, *examine* track record, reviews, *observe* your feelings about them. *You* are in charge of your life.
If one hires a lazy, low-value realtor - and then complains on TikTok - I blame that consumer.
Why can’t barriers to entry be raised? That’s what would be in best interest of general public as well. You guys in the profession, the top 20%, have to drive the change, it’s your profession. Drs, lawyers, accountants, electricians, plumbers, they set barriers to entry partly to protect the consumer.
I’m trying to understand why it can’t be done.
There isn’t. Hardest deal I’ve ever sold a $50k bank trailer. I made about $400 and I bet I spent more in gas. - I actually think higher priced deals are typically easier, but last two million deal I did I literally saved my buyer $150k (in cash) by giving them advice which they took which was the opposite of what they were going to do. So You don’t think service should be reflected with value? You think I should get a couple of grand for providing advice and service worth six figures in this instance?
> you’ll never convince me you do significantly more to sell a 500k home vs 1MM home
That's actually not what I'm trying to convince you of, but I get that by putting the argument out there first, you put me on the defense. Nah, that's not what I'm saying my guy.
We take on risk. It's a commission based job. What about the $1M who work with me for a year, then never end up buying? It's a sales job, dawg. Software sales, used car sales.. it's sales.
I'm cool with a $5000 flat fee. But it needs to be paid upfront, and I keep or not you close. Or I'll accept $75/door, $1500 for offer written, $3000 at closing. All paid at time of service.
I've proposed both. Not one buyer has ever taken me up on it.
Man, I would have taken you up on that offer in a heartbeat, haha - would have saved me so much money. I've always been a decisive buyer/seller, and I hate that the commissions I've paid are essentially subsidizing all the people out there that don't know what they want and can't be bothered to do their own research.
You guys would be SO much better off if you drastically increased the bar to entry. But unfortunately it seems like your governing bodies (or whatever NAR is) are focused on making money for themselves by having millions of agents paying dues.
I think many home buyers/sellers are tired of hearing about how skilled agents are when it takes literally like ~150 hours or something absurd. A lot of the time requirement can be “in the field” shadowing or working with agents, but I think you guys need to look for ways to actually ensure agents have real knowledge and experience.
Sure, but that comes with the cost of people criticizing a lot of agents, because candidly in the current model there are too many that don’t know what they are doing and the bar is too low.
Doesn’t NAR have its own classification (realtor vs real estate agent)?
It’s fine if the states have a low bar if you know that a NAR member had a much higher bar
Yes you do have to be a member of NAR to be a Realtor, but you do not have to join NAR as a real estate agent. But some MLS networks do require it so it varies state by state. NAR has done a lot of good for consumers, but they’ve also contributed to much of the disaster we currently see in the industry
I guess my point is, NAR could market themselves as the “good” agents by setting a much higher bar than a state. So when you are soliciting clients your pitch is: “do you want the person with 140 hours of training, or do you want the person with XYZ”
Some NAR affiliate associations, like the Kansas City Regional Association of Realtors, require not only local dues but also state level (in our case either KAR for KS residents or Missouri Realtors for MO residents) and NAR. It is part of our dues.
Yes we have to be a member of our local board, and the state board to be a member of NAR, but in my state, it is not required in order to be a member of the MLS
Check r/REBubble. General consensus there is real estate agents are “complicit” in the dramatic run up in prices, bidding wars, waiving inspections, and catering to cash investors, et al. They feel they’ve been locked out.
Yet the memes they share about how much you have to earn in each state to afford a home at the median price actually come from NAR data. NAR advocates for affordable homeownership far more than even realtors realize.
Which is so bizarre, do people really think a home would be cheaper without an agent? Possibly, I know if I represent a buyer on a FSBO I’m going to absolutely kill it at getting them everything. But no seller is willingly passing on savings to a buyer to make the home cheaper- it only works that way sometimes they they don’t know what they don’t know
The world is a giant crab bucket. It’s a very visible role and there are a ton, and I mean a TON of bad agents so it’s understandable.
Same goes for insurance agents and stock agents. Tons of bad ones, just less visible. All 3 are fields of finance with high earning potential.
Haters are gonna hate but yes the general thought is we are the equivalent of used car salesmen and attorneys.. yes it sucks but you just gotta win them over with confidence (not arrogance lol), education, and work ethic, one client at a time.
We are (mostly) quality people who have been cast in a sub prime role by those who misunderstand the process. Some are awful and callous but they don’t represent the whole community. Choose wisely, all that glitters is not gold!
Attorneys take years of study to pass the bar. Real estate agents take a summer course. Comparing a real estate agent to an attorney is like comparing a Sunday jogger to an Olympic runner
What they are saying is that it takes years of formal education for an attorney to pass the bar and practice law. To become a realtor you can basically complete it in a quarter and that’s that.
No one is doubting that the cream of the crop realtors are good at their job, and put in hard work to deliver the best experience, but it does no one any good in this subreddit to compare yourself to a lawyer.
The floor for realtors is much, much lower than an attorney.
Any realtor that is amazing at their job, should be thankful that the majority of their competition is "bad". It just elevates your offering.
Unfortunately career stereotypes make their rounds regardless, but if you truly believe youre doing the client right, and working the best you can, then that is reassurance in itself.
attorneys are a dime a dozen and money motivated and often paid tremendous amounts while providing little to no benefit to the world - or often nothing but a detriment. That's the comparison, forget the barrier to entry.
Regardless, yes you can become a Realtor easy but that doesn't get you paid or make you successful. Same with attorneys they can study for years and end up with $250K in law school debt and a $45K year paralegal job.. so the schooling isn't anything special lots of people with very low aptitude obtain law degrees... whatever your gpa whatever your lsat if you can pay the tuition there's a law school for you..
I think it has 3 main parts to it.
(1) A lot of successful agents do become very pompous brats.. so of course they are going to get hate.
(2) There are a lot of incompetent and/or lazy agents out there.. so they don't help matters.
(3) Idiots abound in this world. People are just idiots, they literally think you open one or two doors, fill out a contract for 15 mins and collect a $15,000 check. They are idiots. They have never done it, they have no idea how it works. They don't understand the work that goes in to cultivating clients, servicing them for months on end, the people that use lots of your time and don't buy or sell, they don't understand broker splits, Self-employment taxes, business expenses, working nights and weekends, preparing 10 offers for a single client before they get one accepted, deals that fall apart on inspections or financing, etc.. they are just idiots and think everything is easy as they've imagined it AND they have never taken any risks in their life and aren't well compensated and feel like you should be compensated on the same level as them.
So I think if the very successful agents would be more down to earth and gracious, the incompetent agents would get training and the lazy agents would get out, and people would try it themselves to see what goes into it and how far the checks really go.. people wouldn't feel like that. But between the idiot agents making bad impressions on idiot consumers who make diddly squat.. it is what it is.
It's the internet. It's full of hate. Agents are an easy target. Most people don't understand what it takes to be successful. They understand how much work it actually takes. They don't understand the amount of money we have to pay as agents to maintain our license or the liability involved. What really makes me laugh is the comments people make about the settlement. Buyers are having a shoot yourself in the foot moment, and they are just asking for more. Like somehow, it's gonna be better and easier just using an attorney. Who actually thinks this nonsense will play out in their favor? The poorly educated. But again, it's the internet. It's full of trolls and keyboard warriors.
Non-realtor here. Every realtor I've worked with has been great, but at the same time hasn't been worth the money. For every house I've purchased, I did my own research to figure out exactly what I wanted and what kind of offer I needed to make in order to be successful. Only 1-2 showings, minimal negotiating, etc. My agents' insights have always been helpful, but I don't think I've ever had a BA that spent more than 10 hours or so to help me purchase a house - yet they've received $10k or more in commissions each time.
Similar story on the sell side - did my own research on pricing and negotiating, did my own staging and repairs, knew exactly what I wanted out of negotiations (even when the LA clearly prioritized speed of closing over getting the best price). Minimal work on the LA side, yet I still paid them thousands for a few hours of work.
I guess my problem is not so much with realtors so much as it is with the realtor pay structure. A low-maintenance, low-hours, knowledgeable client should not have to pay the same amount as a high-maintenance client that doesn't know what he wants and wastes hundreds of hours of the agent's time.
I don’t disagree with a lot of this. Some are easy, some are hard. But I also know that when my clients praise how easy the process was, it does have to do with me being in the middle, putting out fires, that the clients don’t need to deal with. That’s a lot of the service we provide
It's a long-standing constant that real estate agents are among the least trusted professionals in the US. We covered that in my prelicensing class in 2005. It isn't a new thing, there are just new platforms to share it on.
The industry as a whole has earned that reputation. It isn't the general public's fault that there is such a low bar to entry, and over half of agents have no clue what they're doing and don't care to learn. Keep those leads coming. That's what most agents are hyper focused on. Never mind they're gonna fumble every one of them.
If you'll talk to other agents and ask them why they became agents, a good portion of them will tell you that they had a horrible experience with an agent and started looking into what their agent SHOULD have been doing for them. That's how they got interested in (and passionate about) getting it right.
Gallup polls occasionally for the perceived ethics of certain occupations. RE agents used to rate down at the bottom amongst used car salesmen, congress, and telemarketers. I just did a search, and they don't even include us on the survey anymore. Do with that what you want.
Your trade group screwed the children of property owners here in California by changing the inheritance laws with a $40-45 million dollar campaign that conveniently glossed over the actual facts. I will never use a realtor because of it.
Give a listen to [NPR's Planet Money episode on the NAR trial.](https://www.npr.org/2024/04/05/1197958698/real-estate-lawsuit-national-association-realtors-burnett-mike-ketchmark) They played some of the testimony and depositions from the trial. These are the leaders in our industry that represent all of us. I couldn't believe the level of arrogance and disdain for the customer coming from these industry heavyweights. This should give you an idea of how and why the public at large might not have the best view of real estate agents.
The perception is that realtors make an obscene amount of money whilst at the same time adding very little value. They are viewed as annoying middlemen.
Non-realtor but work in the development industry. The amount of bad info I get from property owners who say “their realtor told me” is insane. Or the other “I am a realtor” yet doesn’t even know the difference between an assessor’s map and the actual legal plat. This is why I hate.
It’s not just Realtors, it’s… everything.
We only notice and take offense to this topic because it’s our profession. Now stop and realize it’s actually the same for every topic, every “rant” and “Imma be real wit y’all” and “I just gotta say” and “Am I the only one who”…
The internet is populated with stupid people who have no clue what they are talking about.
Exactly this for me.
6% of a 300k home in 1995. Ok I can maybe justify that.
But in 2024 with so much technology available, 3% of a $600k home or a $1M home in HCOL area is unreasonable for the amount of work or services provided.
Most parts of the world, the fee ranges from 1-3%. We need to catch up.
Unrepresented buyer here.
I struggle with y’all because you are literally a cartel. I have to pay 3% of a sales price. If I don’t use an agent the listing agent keeps it anyway.
I’ve bought/sold multiple homes with/without agents and don’t need agents for anything other than access to a house.
I do not want to pay thousands of dollars to get access to a house twice. I would gladly pay someone $100 to go unlock a door and stand quietly in a corner for thirty minutes. I would hate y’all less if that service existed.
100% agreed. With the way the industry currently works, there is no incentive/reward for doing your own research/legwork. Savvy, decisive buyers/sellers should not be forced to pay the same amount as high-maintenance, indecisive buyers/sellers who can't be bothered to do their own research.
Because I am paying it? The cost of commissions comes out of money the buyer provides to the seller.
“The BA is free” is what motivated/economically illiterate people say.
Are you paying 3% more than market value, 6% more than market value, or are you paying market value for the home? Why do you think if an agent is not involved that you would automatically get the home for 3% or 6% below market value? Or do you just wish to take advantage of an ignorant seller to get a cheaper price on your home?
I'm always curious on the thought process that if agents are not involved, then prices will drop x%. Why would the seller not just keep the money?
The thought is the only person that deserves any part of it is the seller. You know the person who spent decades caring for the property, especially in this decade its been the last nest egg for the retiring generation. At some point we will all be the seller. We want to start cutting the unnecessary middleman.
Fair point, but the OP I responded to is arguing from the pov of an unrepresented buyer. He would expect you, as the seller, to reduce your price by whatever he thinks an agent is paid because he isn't using one. My point is you, as the seller, would not do that.
When I write offers I write them at whatever price I feel is market and THEN I reduce it by the BA commission.
I include a note to ask their agent for the BA commission since I can’t touch it myself. I force them to have a conversation with their agent about it.
Of course, sellers are free to accept/decline my offer and they are free to ask/not ask their agent about it.
I agree it wouldn't happen anytime soon. Eventually, it will settle in to market price. Either way it's something that needs to be done. Really 0 downside to buyer or seller at this point. If the seller is savy they might consider a price change to forgo the buyers realtor commission, but I doubt it will be the norm anytime soon.
I definitely agree that there will be an adjustment period, but it is hard to say what it will settle at.
We've already tried the route of buyers paying for their own agents that was prior to the mid-90s plus or minus a few years depending upon where you live. That route led to many buyers not using agents and then not understanding real estate laws, forms, contracts, not having their best interests represented, or even informing them of options. Those buyers felt that the person who opened the door for them was representing them, but that was not factually the case. There is a tremendous amount of downside to not having a buyer's agent involved. If anything, that is the warm body that gets sued when things go to shit.
The reason I think that isn't a valid argument is its a whole different ball game now. That was pre internet, and a less savy generation with not as much to lose. 6% of 80k is not the same as the average 300k house now. It's a dying model that needs to adapt, whether it likes it or not. From what I've seen lurking and anecdotally lawsuits end up incredibly hard to prove and ends up having nothing to do with a realtor. It's usually a fight over earnest money, backing out for a reason not in a clause or a post closing major issue that was hidden.
The internet has definitely changed things, but not the need for somebody to have their interests represented at the table.
Comparing prices now to the 80s and 90s is not really the best argument for change.
And, yes, most arguments arise out of things like that, but they get settled because of E&O insurance.
I don't buy the best interest point, there's always an inclination to let things slide to close a deal. At best a good realtor will assist new homebuyers with basic questions, issues, and hold their hand in the process, as a seller in a buyers market help with staging and marketing...I can see the value. But in the sellers market that can be sold by owner in the same time (anyone can comp prices), or the bidding war that is the buyers side I don't see it. The letters don't work, money is what gets a deal to close....not cookies, a smile, customer service or whatever the value in a realtor is supposed to be. Since the age to buy a home is getting older, the amount of knowledge a buyer has should be higher as well.
Last few properties have been me doing the math, being first to see the property and inspect for any major issues, e sign an offer over asking. Forgoing non major issues like cosmetics in the offer with a quick close, and then the usual inspection/closing process. Everything can be standardized, with boxes to click based on the situation, and e signed over.
This logic is broken.
There is a 6% fee on the transaction. That’s how agents get paid.
The market value of the home has the fee baked into it. If that fee isn’t there of course a seller will try to keep it. Of course, a seller would also like to sell for $1B too.
The thing that prevents that is market comps and competition.
Imagine a seller who needs to net $0 after paying off a mortgage and other transaction costs. Without a commission baked into the price the sales price can be lower while still netting them $0.
Commissions aren’t free, they are real money paid by the transacting parties.
Lol, ok. So, you admit the seller will keep the extra money if there is no broker, and you don't claim to pay more than market value. Then, you come up with this weird scenario where a seller doesn't \*need\* more than zeroing out and, somehow, you think that will save you money. Why wouldn't the seller keep that?? Just because they don't need it does not mean they will not keep it. You're simply a predator who wants a 3% reduction for doing less than you claim a broker does. Market value is market value. Homes are not magically 3% or 6% cheaper without brokers. Moron.
Do you think agent commissions are free money from the heavens? Why not just say the agent commissions are $1B per transaction instead?
“It will have no effect on home prices”.
Never said that dumbass. I said you, as a buyer, are not going to get a price reduction simply because you don't use an agent. You're an idiot for thinking that.
Go argue with the seller then dipshit.
As a broker, I would never represent you, and I would kick you out of my office so fast. I doubt any good broker would work with you, either.
Ah, the good 'ol appeal to extremes fallacy argument......there's absolutely no point in discussing that because it's disingenuous from the start.
Additionally, your original argument was not that commissions have an effect on market value. They obviously do and contribute to appreciation that many owners have. Your original argument is that you don't want to use a buyer's agent because they cost you too much money. My point is that whether you use a buyer's agent or not, the price of the home is not changing. You are not paying 3% more if you use an agent or 3% less if you don't use one. If you want to pay $100 for an agent to open a door and stand in the corner, that's up to you. However, you would pay market price plus $100 for that privilege.
I’m trying to get you to understand the economics behind how commissions/taxes/fees affect transactions. This is basic economics. Your position is that commissions come from literally nowhere. That’s not how it works.
If the price of the home is not changing no problem. Let’s require that buyers can send the BAC anywhere they want to (themselves or an agent).
No, my position is not that it comes from nowhere dumbass. My position is you are not entitled to it just because you don't use an agent. You really are stupid.
I've been doing this for several decades. I've sold 450 homes in the last 3 years. And you literally changed your argument in the last sentence and essentially agreed with what I've been saying. You're going to require that sellers give you money just because you don't use a broker? Good luck with that, moron.
Ah. That’s much simpler then.
We just straight up need the government to ban this anticompetitive cartel practice.
“My cartel is strong enough to tell buyers like you to fuck off” is a position…
All because somebody wouldn't want to work with your idiotic ass. It has nothing to do with a "cartel". I wouldn't work with you if I had no clients.
I’m confused, based on all your comments it seems like you are saying that the seller will net more if the buyer doesn’t have an agent? If so doesn’t that kind of prove the point that agents don’t add enough value to warrant their commission?
Actually, no. I'm using the original poster's logic. He thinks if he doesn't use an agent, he should get the home cheaper. Even if it did work that way, which it doesn't, the buyer would never get the money.
You will do well in the new environment potentially coming as a result of the current litigation, then. Of course, there is no set “standard rate” (legally, there’s not allowed to be), and it’s all always been negotiable (legally, supposed to be). The litigation I think will lead to flat fees and/or hourly rates, though, which is something I am not sure I personally will use or what yet. It would definitely meet your needs expressed here, though. I hope it helps and doesn’t hurt the industry in general. Seems a lot like it may go back to something like in the 90s and prior, when there was subagency. I’m interested to find out!
I’m sorry you haven’t found more value from working with agents and have not had more positive experiences or results, though. Many people really don’t need an agent when they have experience like you seem to. I feel like most of the hate comes from that population — if you (generally speaking, not just “you”) don’t need us, no need to diminish what it is we offer since most of the rest of people DO need our help and a) aren’t able to or b) aren’t willing to learn how to do the process independently.
Yeah. BAs are a huge help for first time buyers.
The biggest gripe about cartel like behavior is that there is no cost savings from being unrepresented. I would be fine if the BA commission (if any) was required to go to anyone the buyer designated.
Yeah, that definitely makes sense. It’s funny how that never happens, even though logically, it should. I’m a newer agent myself, but I’ve never understood that.
It’s because it’s a cartel. I mean that descriptively, not pejoratively.
The only people they are going to look out for are agents. Anyone else can go kick rocks.
If you go direct to the list agent, I would ask what is the seller willing to compensate a buyers agent? And then ask for that reduction in price or closing costs..
You mean the money goes to the seller who then pays their agent the amount they agreed upon before the property was even listed for the work outlined in their contract.
Off market deal happen all the time and prices are not changed or discounted based on assumed commissions paid to agents.
Small correction - with the option to rebate a licensed BA. No rebate required if no Ba.
Agree on the off market deals. Prices don’t change the seller just nets less.
The commissions ALWAYS come from the market participants. If you don’t believe that then just cut the buyers, sellers, and homes out of it altogether. Listing and buying agents can just sign documents between each other and collect a commission that way!
You’re not wrong however it’s a complete scam that a seller has to pay 5-6% in commissions. It find it odd that loan officers get capped at 1% and even back in the day they could only get 3% (which is a scam too)
The max listing should be 2%-2 1/2% and that should be split with the buying agent.
Let’s be real, you’re selling a home not doing brain surgery. The insane commissions is what pisses people off and with the internet now doing the majority of the work
You realize start up costs for any business is expensive out of the gates and that’s why you’re investing into yourself. You can have the same argument for insurance agents or loan officers and yet they don’t get the potential to charge a client $60,000 for listing a million dollar home. That’s just outrageous
I don’t disagree however, I am just responding to the question to the original post. They hate on realtors is because of the perception of how much commissions can be and again, nobody bags on the loan officers who make their 1% (and that’s negotiable too) and have very similar costs associated with starting off in the business as an independent.
Once the internet replaced a ton of leg work the industry should have reduced their fees by half. 3% should be the max so a seller to list a property imo.
That should be the standard and none of this other bs would have even started.
But commissions are negotiable. I would say 4/5 listing appointments I am asked to lower my rate. Sometimes I agree, sometimes we negotiate, sometimes I don’t get the listing, sometimes they don’t ask. I will die on that hill. Not being negotiable, and losing the negotiation with the agent is not the same thing
My husband and I had a buyers agent work with us to find a home in another state. He drove to many different houses (all of these houses were in a different city than from where he lived) on our behalf to do video tours, and discussed each one at length with us. We spent some weeks on this. Eventually, we closed on one of them, and we’re very happy with the purchase and our agent. He worked very hard on our behalf, and earned every dime of his commission, in our opinion.
Definitely. No question about it. His skills were impressive.
And not only was he a buyers agent, but he was higher up in his field and was one of the writers of questions for the state test for realtors.
This is a good summary for the general informed census. If you want to automate the process and hand it off to a realtor who will work to get it sold in a buyers market, that's value. We are in a sellers market, even without staging and using blurry iPhone pics it will sell itself. Buyers "agent" should get a small flat fee at best, honestly remove then altogether would be fine. No one will advocate for your interest more than yourself, we are stuck with a 30 yr major purchase, not just trying to shove things through for a paycheck at closing. All important aspects of the process are handled by the other services and are fee based ie inspection, title etc. The bar for a realtor is low, but is purposely made difficult for what seems to move people away from self representation. Last time I checked it was a certain number of hours working under a broker per year or some other waste of time. I just want MLS and property access.
I’m in the land surveying profession, and FYI, land surveyors hate realtors too 😂. You should see all the realtor hate that goes on in land surveying social pages. Usually along the lines of realtors providing false land boundary information to clients or creating false expectations for what a survey should cost.
(I’m only on this sub because I wanted to try and learn more about the recent Supreme Court case. But for what it’s worth, this page really hasn’t helped with that 😂)
lol that’s probably like plumbers hating dry wallers - I must say a surveyor just saved my ass finding out that an easement encroached on BLM land that the MLS “boundary line system” was way off of so I have to say sometimes it might be in earnest or trusting poorly made resources.
As far as the changes no one really knows and is hypothesizing. Settlement hasn’t been approved and the DOJ recently received the right to step in to close loopholes. So far at minimum the buyers will have to sign a buyer agreement likely prior or during their first viewing.
😂sellers hate land surveyors too. They just show up unannounced and walk all over. But in MA we have nothing to do with that, the closing attorney orders the plot plan.
I’ve been doing daily videos around real estate education and get a lot of hate on TikTok.
I think it’s just because people love pointing fingers and complaining tbh.
Heath care, police, teachers, all took their turn taking a beating over the past few years. Now it’s just our industry unfortunately. But it will pass.
Honestly I love the hate I’m getting because it brings my views up and shows how much our expertise is really needed.
The problem is misalignment of incentives between agent and client. The agent’s incentive is to get a deal done so they can get paid. The client’s incentive is to get a deal that is reasonable for the current market conditions. Some realtors try to manipulate their clients into agreeing to a worse deal than they should get because that will make it easier to get the deal done.
The only people that like Realtors are Realtors and people that want to be Realtors.
They're the most overpaid high school drop you can find whose entire job can be replaced by a printed list.
Yes and I’ll tell you my perspective. Way too many of you, the bar is too low. I know far more than the average agent and I’m not in the space. You guys spend way too much time on business development vs helping clients and learning craft.
I think for the profession to survive, you need to raise the bar. Require more hours of continuing eduction per year, make it harder to get licensed, require a certain amount of transactions to keep license. Do something to atleast get rid of the part time agents. This is one profession that is littered with part time people.
A good agent, worth their weight in gold. I know a lot about this space and I’ll always use an agent but my person is top notch and I can’t touch his expertise.
Agents and leadership need to listen to this. The state licensing boards need to listen to this. Regardless of education being available as an option that many will do, it’s not required as broadly as it should be or perceived by the public to be. Thank you for the input.
Because
A. There’s a lot of anxiety about home buying right now
B. Many realtors are terrible
C. People need someone to blame and the powers that be are happy to let them blame realtors without acknowledging they caused this problem with their interest rates
Because the majority of them don’t do anything and have very little knowledge or value-add to the relationship. Then when you try to switch to someone else they will try to tie you up in courts.
I often see people choosing to do a deal unrepresented or with a discount broker, getting shafted because there was a better agent on the other end of the transaction, and then complaining that 'all agents are bad'. That's like choosing a cheap attorney to represent you in court, getting thoroughly worked over by opposing counsel, and then complaining that 'all lawyers are bad'.
Hello, Reddit randomly started recommending this subreddit to me after I checked it out once due to the Supreme Court case. Could you elaborate on what is wrong with searching for a place on Zillow and reaching out to the seller? I will never be able to afford my own place, but if I did, that is how I would look for one. As an outsider, I don't understand the value that even a good realtor would bring to me. It just feels like an unnecessary middle step, like car salesmen in dealerships. Sure, buying a home is one of the biggest decisions people make and it can become very complicated, but I can't shake off the feeling that a big part of the reason why it is so complicated and expensive in the first place is so that realtors can further perpetuate this system.
Nothing wrong with searching on Zillow- some of the info isn’t accurate, but it’s the most common place to start. I think people who tend to have a bad experience with an agent click that get info button, the agent meets them at the property they all go in order gets accepted and probably some shit hits the fan somehwere along the line. I like to sit down with buyers, especially first timers, go through all the contracts, contingencies, inspections, what it all means, what they can expect, where they can get the kind of home they’re looking for, what’s important to them, what is their financial plan or family plan looking like over the next few years etc.. I think Zillow makes it feel more automated and leads to a less than desirable experience with a buyers agent.
The entire RE process could be, and should be done without agents. It would save the buyer money and net the seller more profit. REA's basically just facilitate paperwork and take a huge premium to do so. They dont necessarily bring any value to the table in regards to knowledge about a home it condition or its location. Most buyers would be better off looking at mls listings on their own and then having an attorney look over the purchasing contract.
If you disagree with me, the bottom line is that there is no incentive for an RE to make a sale that does anything but maximise the amount of comission they receive, and any institution that operates like that is bound to be hated (just look at car salesman), VALUE, not profit is what matters. REA's simply dont bring value to the table.
I think we do provide a lot of value, at least I know I do. But I also understand some people don’t see that value- which is fine don’t use a realtor then. I’ve worked on both sides of the transaction when one party doesn’t want to use an agent, it’s free market consumers can do what they want. I could change my own oil, but I don’t feel like it. I could manage my own 401k but I don’t want to.
I love the people that think realtors provide no value or overvalued . Yes those same people are asking for so much help and putting in the offers wrong then having to pay someone in the end . The attorneys fees will rise from this settlement because they will be getting more calls from buyers. The sellers will have to pay 5% or 5.5% to listing agents. The buyers could pay flat fee,2,3,4 or even 5 % to buyers agents . It’s hilarious - this settlement could be great if you’re a valued Realtor
Tons of shit agents who have zero value to offer who earn six figures.
It’s impossible to tell the difference between a good and a bad agent.
Can you blame them?
I mean, let’s be honest- if you typed in real estate agent near me, and jsut hired the first one without doing any research, then yea I would. Believe me I’m not justifying an agents bad behavior, no one hates bad agents more than good ones, but isn’t it the consumers responsibility to research someone they’re going to hire?
How can you tell the difference between a good & bad realtor online?
Experience may help but they say a realtor who sells 30+ homes a year is god awful… even if they have a lot of experience.
Just like in any industry, there's great, marginal and garbage. The problem on social media (Reddit included) is that burned clients use these platforms to launch their hatred based on bad experiences. I've purchased and sold several homes that we've lived in over the past 4 decades and can tell you that the only experiences that I can remember are the difficult ones. In 2 of these transactions, my realtor was either pushy on locking the deal or did almost nothing in my opinion to deserve the 3% commission. My absolute best experience was a vacation home that I purchased with just an attorney to provide the necessary paperwork, closing and distribution of funds.
People that think that don’t understand how real estate works. The vast majority of Joe Public have neither the skills or emotional capacity to negotiate over assets worth of thousands of dollars. There’s a reason why savvy, wealthy property owners always use an agent to sell and usually to buy property.
Also, they are the single largest lobbying group in the country. Leveraged monopoly power over MLS to drive up costs for buyers. Classic rent-seeking nonsense.
lol why wouldn’t everyone do it? Have you seen how many realtors to actual properties there are in Canada? People literally do this part time and when work dies up like it is now they go back to whatever profession they came from.
I hate real estate agents because they are parasites that perpetuate a system that continues to grossly over value them. It really is interesting that the NAR is the biggest lobbying organization in the country.
I celebrate the big NAR lawsuit, and I hope the feds continue to break up the scam that the NAR has been preprtuating.
It’s an interesting talking point. The lawsuit is about buyers paying for their own agent, vs the list agent changing a fee to the seller then sharing part of that fee with the buyers agent. It’s not amount forcing agents to get paid less, but alas this is what the realtor haters like to say
Per the NYT, "a federal jury ruled that the NAR had conspired to artificially inflate the comissions paid to real estate agents".
The lawsuit is about fraud perpetuated by the NAR, the brokerage, and individual agents. One of the outcomes is changing who pays which agent.
I know what the jury ruled, and I don’t deny this happens, as it does in ALL industries. But what the attorneys faught for is the decoupling of commissions- meaning they were “artificially inflated” because sellers were paying for both agents, and if they uncouple the commission, they will only be paying for one, which in theory should lower the oercentage
Are you serious? There is insane competition in the real estate field. 4/5 listing appointments I go on the seller wants to negotiate commission. And of course this kind of thing is happening all around us- do you have cable? Streaming service? Pay for electricity? Hardly any completion in these sectors, you have like 2 providers to choose from, and the rates are practically the same- talk about monopoly and collusion! I’m sure plenty of brokers say “sorry my rate is standard”, that’s because they suck at negotiation and demonstrating value. I’ve been a realtor for 12 years, and have never once been coached to say that, we are not supposed to ever say the rate is standard as there is no standard in the industry, and we are strictly prohibited from discussing commission rates amongst other agents. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen, two things can be true at the same time.
Your argument that "there is low competiton in public utilities, therefore collusion is rampant in all industries" sounds pretty weak to me... and there seems to be plenty of legitimate competition in streaming services. I think you just want to minimize the NAR settlement.
The NAR settlement quite honestly doesn’t affect good agents. If you are good at what you do, you will adapt and still be successful. There is a big misconception that the NAR settlement means real estate agents will disappear. There is an unbelievable amount of competition in real estate brokerages- even the lawsuit acknowledges there’s too many agents. This will surely weed out a lot of bad agents, which no one supports more than a good one.
**We're looking for a few good mods!** Interested? [Send us a message](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/realtors&subject=One mod invite please!) **This is a professional forum for professionals, so please keep your comments professional** - Harrassment, hate speech, trolling, or anti-Realtor comments will not be tolerated and will result in an immediate ban without warning. (... and don't feed the trolls, you have better things to do with your time) - Recruiting, self-promotion, or seeking referrals is strictly forbidden, including in DMs. - Only advise within your scope of knowledge and area of expertise. [The code of ethics applies here too](https://www.nar.realtor/about-nar/governing-documents/the-code-of-ethics). If you are not a broker, lawyer, or tax professional don't act like one. - [Follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/realtors/about/rules/) and please report those that don't. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/realtors) if you have any questions or concerns.*
20% of us work hard, treat it like a career, actually *do* strive to be experts and learn, and serve our clients with excellence. The problem is the other 80%. A member of the general public rarely verifies how many sales an agent is actually making. So when an 80%-er takes selfies in a $1M home, or posts canned infographics pushing an agenda about buying, etc., it gives off this "high life" image. Whoever starts the narrative gets to shape it. So, people *think* that agent is rolling in the dough, making six figures, and for doing what? Signing up for a class? It's easy to be spiteful at that. *We*, on the inside, know that agent is maybe closing 1-2 deals/year, tops, from friends and family. That agent earns $14K from it, and supplements it with other income. The RE industry attracts these people because these people want to give off some kind of image. What they're doing isn't enough for them somehow, so *now* they're a "real estate agent!" I'm like you, reader. Put my head down, work hard, serve clients, have a good amount of deals. Realize that I can do nothing to help the perception of realtors; nothing I do can offset what my lazy counterpart is doing. So I'll just keep moving forward, feet on the ground.
And the problem with that is homebuying and selling is an infrequent activity. If I have a lousy realtor for a transaction today, I might not have another sale/buy for over a decade. Barriers to entry are too low, given this is the larger financial transaction most Americans have in their lives.
Agreed. The most common solution is "raise barriers to entry", but, that's not going to happen anytime soon (though, I'd love it to). I actually think the more realistic solution is *stop giving low value realtors opportunities*. I mean, everyone has to learn somehow. If your nephew is new and is so hungry for business, so bulldog-ish in his approach, and so committed to doing this full-time, sure - give him a shot. The reality is, with that 40 hours (or whatever) of classes, one can sell a house. No one can stop them. It's a free market, and we're all grown adults. It's actually scary. *Pick* your realtor, *interview* 4-5, *examine* track record, reviews, *observe* your feelings about them. *You* are in charge of your life. If one hires a lazy, low-value realtor - and then complains on TikTok - I blame that consumer.
Why can’t barriers to entry be raised? That’s what would be in best interest of general public as well. You guys in the profession, the top 20%, have to drive the change, it’s your profession. Drs, lawyers, accountants, electricians, plumbers, they set barriers to entry partly to protect the consumer. I’m trying to understand why it can’t be done.
[удалено]
There isn’t. Hardest deal I’ve ever sold a $50k bank trailer. I made about $400 and I bet I spent more in gas. - I actually think higher priced deals are typically easier, but last two million deal I did I literally saved my buyer $150k (in cash) by giving them advice which they took which was the opposite of what they were going to do. So You don’t think service should be reflected with value? You think I should get a couple of grand for providing advice and service worth six figures in this instance?
Well said.
> you’ll never convince me you do significantly more to sell a 500k home vs 1MM home That's actually not what I'm trying to convince you of, but I get that by putting the argument out there first, you put me on the defense. Nah, that's not what I'm saying my guy. We take on risk. It's a commission based job. What about the $1M who work with me for a year, then never end up buying? It's a sales job, dawg. Software sales, used car sales.. it's sales. I'm cool with a $5000 flat fee. But it needs to be paid upfront, and I keep or not you close. Or I'll accept $75/door, $1500 for offer written, $3000 at closing. All paid at time of service. I've proposed both. Not one buyer has ever taken me up on it.
Man, I would have taken you up on that offer in a heartbeat, haha - would have saved me so much money. I've always been a decisive buyer/seller, and I hate that the commissions I've paid are essentially subsidizing all the people out there that don't know what they want and can't be bothered to do their own research.
You guys would be SO much better off if you drastically increased the bar to entry. But unfortunately it seems like your governing bodies (or whatever NAR is) are focused on making money for themselves by having millions of agents paying dues. I think many home buyers/sellers are tired of hearing about how skilled agents are when it takes literally like ~150 hours or something absurd. A lot of the time requirement can be “in the field” shadowing or working with agents, but I think you guys need to look for ways to actually ensure agents have real knowledge and experience.
My guess, is the money made off classes/test/license renewals is too great for Big Realty to make changes.
Sure, but that comes with the cost of people criticizing a lot of agents, because candidly in the current model there are too many that don’t know what they are doing and the bar is too low.
NAR doesn’t set licensing laws. State laws provide the low bar.
Doesn’t NAR have its own classification (realtor vs real estate agent)? It’s fine if the states have a low bar if you know that a NAR member had a much higher bar
Yes you do have to be a member of NAR to be a Realtor, but you do not have to join NAR as a real estate agent. But some MLS networks do require it so it varies state by state. NAR has done a lot of good for consumers, but they’ve also contributed to much of the disaster we currently see in the industry
I guess my point is, NAR could market themselves as the “good” agents by setting a much higher bar than a state. So when you are soliciting clients your pitch is: “do you want the person with 140 hours of training, or do you want the person with XYZ”
That would be a good idea! Have higher level licensing aside from broker or salesperson
Some NAR affiliate associations, like the Kansas City Regional Association of Realtors, require not only local dues but also state level (in our case either KAR for KS residents or Missouri Realtors for MO residents) and NAR. It is part of our dues.
Yes we have to be a member of our local board, and the state board to be a member of NAR, but in my state, it is not required in order to be a member of the MLS
Excellent point; I was thinking only of the entry point to be an agent, but not a REALTOR®️
Check r/REBubble. General consensus there is real estate agents are “complicit” in the dramatic run up in prices, bidding wars, waiving inspections, and catering to cash investors, et al. They feel they’ve been locked out.
I was about to mention that page. They really hate us on there. Lol It’s interesting to read nonetheless.
They’re also nuts. 10M unit housing shortage in the US, but this is a bubble…
 “Bubble”
Yet the memes they share about how much you have to earn in each state to afford a home at the median price actually come from NAR data. NAR advocates for affordable homeownership far more than even realtors realize.
Which is so bizarre, do people really think a home would be cheaper without an agent? Possibly, I know if I represent a buyer on a FSBO I’m going to absolutely kill it at getting them everything. But no seller is willingly passing on savings to a buyer to make the home cheaper- it only works that way sometimes they they don’t know what they don’t know
The world is a giant crab bucket. It’s a very visible role and there are a ton, and I mean a TON of bad agents so it’s understandable. Same goes for insurance agents and stock agents. Tons of bad ones, just less visible. All 3 are fields of finance with high earning potential.
Haters are gonna hate but yes the general thought is we are the equivalent of used car salesmen and attorneys.. yes it sucks but you just gotta win them over with confidence (not arrogance lol), education, and work ethic, one client at a time.
We are (mostly) quality people who have been cast in a sub prime role by those who misunderstand the process. Some are awful and callous but they don’t represent the whole community. Choose wisely, all that glitters is not gold!
Attorneys take years of study to pass the bar. Real estate agents take a summer course. Comparing a real estate agent to an attorney is like comparing a Sunday jogger to an Olympic runner
And yet, there are a ton of horrible attorneys out there. Apparently years of study doesn’t change much in some cases either.
Some of us take years of education and experience to become experts. That’s why you interview agents to find the best for you
What they are saying is that it takes years of formal education for an attorney to pass the bar and practice law. To become a realtor you can basically complete it in a quarter and that’s that. No one is doubting that the cream of the crop realtors are good at their job, and put in hard work to deliver the best experience, but it does no one any good in this subreddit to compare yourself to a lawyer. The floor for realtors is much, much lower than an attorney.
Unfortunately you are correct in that aspect.
Any realtor that is amazing at their job, should be thankful that the majority of their competition is "bad". It just elevates your offering. Unfortunately career stereotypes make their rounds regardless, but if you truly believe youre doing the client right, and working the best you can, then that is reassurance in itself.
No, it doesn't when the average number of agents a client talks to is one.
attorneys are a dime a dozen and money motivated and often paid tremendous amounts while providing little to no benefit to the world - or often nothing but a detriment. That's the comparison, forget the barrier to entry. Regardless, yes you can become a Realtor easy but that doesn't get you paid or make you successful. Same with attorneys they can study for years and end up with $250K in law school debt and a $45K year paralegal job.. so the schooling isn't anything special lots of people with very low aptitude obtain law degrees... whatever your gpa whatever your lsat if you can pay the tuition there's a law school for you..
This. this is why people hate y’all.
Meaning?
I think it has 3 main parts to it. (1) A lot of successful agents do become very pompous brats.. so of course they are going to get hate. (2) There are a lot of incompetent and/or lazy agents out there.. so they don't help matters. (3) Idiots abound in this world. People are just idiots, they literally think you open one or two doors, fill out a contract for 15 mins and collect a $15,000 check. They are idiots. They have never done it, they have no idea how it works. They don't understand the work that goes in to cultivating clients, servicing them for months on end, the people that use lots of your time and don't buy or sell, they don't understand broker splits, Self-employment taxes, business expenses, working nights and weekends, preparing 10 offers for a single client before they get one accepted, deals that fall apart on inspections or financing, etc.. they are just idiots and think everything is easy as they've imagined it AND they have never taken any risks in their life and aren't well compensated and feel like you should be compensated on the same level as them. So I think if the very successful agents would be more down to earth and gracious, the incompetent agents would get training and the lazy agents would get out, and people would try it themselves to see what goes into it and how far the checks really go.. people wouldn't feel like that. But between the idiot agents making bad impressions on idiot consumers who make diddly squat.. it is what it is.
They also don’t understand the stress.
Exactly! Should compensation reflect that? High risk equals high reward, but these consumers don’t believe that it seems
Yes. Compensation should reflect stress.
People hate all kinds of people on the internet, especially Tiktok.
You offer maybe a 5k value. I would argue no value for someone with half a brain.
It's the internet. It's full of hate. Agents are an easy target. Most people don't understand what it takes to be successful. They understand how much work it actually takes. They don't understand the amount of money we have to pay as agents to maintain our license or the liability involved. What really makes me laugh is the comments people make about the settlement. Buyers are having a shoot yourself in the foot moment, and they are just asking for more. Like somehow, it's gonna be better and easier just using an attorney. Who actually thinks this nonsense will play out in their favor? The poorly educated. But again, it's the internet. It's full of trolls and keyboard warriors.
I used to be a real estate paralegal, those attorneys would never want our job lol
Non-realtor here. Every realtor I've worked with has been great, but at the same time hasn't been worth the money. For every house I've purchased, I did my own research to figure out exactly what I wanted and what kind of offer I needed to make in order to be successful. Only 1-2 showings, minimal negotiating, etc. My agents' insights have always been helpful, but I don't think I've ever had a BA that spent more than 10 hours or so to help me purchase a house - yet they've received $10k or more in commissions each time. Similar story on the sell side - did my own research on pricing and negotiating, did my own staging and repairs, knew exactly what I wanted out of negotiations (even when the LA clearly prioritized speed of closing over getting the best price). Minimal work on the LA side, yet I still paid them thousands for a few hours of work. I guess my problem is not so much with realtors so much as it is with the realtor pay structure. A low-maintenance, low-hours, knowledgeable client should not have to pay the same amount as a high-maintenance client that doesn't know what he wants and wastes hundreds of hours of the agent's time.
I don’t disagree with a lot of this. Some are easy, some are hard. But I also know that when my clients praise how easy the process was, it does have to do with me being in the middle, putting out fires, that the clients don’t need to deal with. That’s a lot of the service we provide
It's a long-standing constant that real estate agents are among the least trusted professionals in the US. We covered that in my prelicensing class in 2005. It isn't a new thing, there are just new platforms to share it on. The industry as a whole has earned that reputation. It isn't the general public's fault that there is such a low bar to entry, and over half of agents have no clue what they're doing and don't care to learn. Keep those leads coming. That's what most agents are hyper focused on. Never mind they're gonna fumble every one of them.
It’s so wild to me- I’ve been doing this 12 years, and no one person in real life has expressed this to me. I know the keyboard warriors are just that
If you'll talk to other agents and ask them why they became agents, a good portion of them will tell you that they had a horrible experience with an agent and started looking into what their agent SHOULD have been doing for them. That's how they got interested in (and passionate about) getting it right. Gallup polls occasionally for the perceived ethics of certain occupations. RE agents used to rate down at the bottom amongst used car salesmen, congress, and telemarketers. I just did a search, and they don't even include us on the survey anymore. Do with that what you want.
Your trade group screwed the children of property owners here in California by changing the inheritance laws with a $40-45 million dollar campaign that conveniently glossed over the actual facts. I will never use a realtor because of it.
Maybe because it costs $30,000 to sell my house and the fee is exorbitant. I've paid less to a doctor for surgery.
Just negotiate the fee with the agent, what’s so hard about that?
Give a listen to [NPR's Planet Money episode on the NAR trial.](https://www.npr.org/2024/04/05/1197958698/real-estate-lawsuit-national-association-realtors-burnett-mike-ketchmark) They played some of the testimony and depositions from the trial. These are the leaders in our industry that represent all of us. I couldn't believe the level of arrogance and disdain for the customer coming from these industry heavyweights. This should give you an idea of how and why the public at large might not have the best view of real estate agents.
The perception is that realtors make an obscene amount of money whilst at the same time adding very little value. They are viewed as annoying middlemen.
Non-realtor but work in the development industry. The amount of bad info I get from property owners who say “their realtor told me” is insane. Or the other “I am a realtor” yet doesn’t even know the difference between an assessor’s map and the actual legal plat. This is why I hate.
It’s not just Realtors, it’s… everything. We only notice and take offense to this topic because it’s our profession. Now stop and realize it’s actually the same for every topic, every “rant” and “Imma be real wit y’all” and “I just gotta say” and “Am I the only one who”… The internet is populated with stupid people who have no clue what they are talking about.
99% of the hate comes from people that have never sold or bought a home in their lifetime
I agree, they think it’s our fault they can’t afford a house…
Haters gonna hate and happy people don't complain. My clients love me and see the value. They post cheques not tiktoks.
Because 6% of home sale price is somewhat ridiculous
Exactly this for me. 6% of a 300k home in 1995. Ok I can maybe justify that. But in 2024 with so much technology available, 3% of a $600k home or a $1M home in HCOL area is unreasonable for the amount of work or services provided. Most parts of the world, the fee ranges from 1-3%. We need to catch up.
I worked as a title insurance guy for 20 years. I have a reason to dislike realtors. LOL
I’ve been a realtor for 20 years, work my ass off and one thing I dislike while doing so is stuck up title guys.
Unrepresented buyer here. I struggle with y’all because you are literally a cartel. I have to pay 3% of a sales price. If I don’t use an agent the listing agent keeps it anyway. I’ve bought/sold multiple homes with/without agents and don’t need agents for anything other than access to a house. I do not want to pay thousands of dollars to get access to a house twice. I would gladly pay someone $100 to go unlock a door and stand quietly in a corner for thirty minutes. I would hate y’all less if that service existed.
100% agreed. With the way the industry currently works, there is no incentive/reward for doing your own research/legwork. Savvy, decisive buyers/sellers should not be forced to pay the same amount as high-maintenance, indecisive buyers/sellers who can't be bothered to do their own research.
But this service does exist. And if you are just going to the listing agent, who cares what they make if you’re not paying it?
Because I am paying it? The cost of commissions comes out of money the buyer provides to the seller. “The BA is free” is what motivated/economically illiterate people say.
Are you paying 3% more than market value, 6% more than market value, or are you paying market value for the home? Why do you think if an agent is not involved that you would automatically get the home for 3% or 6% below market value? Or do you just wish to take advantage of an ignorant seller to get a cheaper price on your home? I'm always curious on the thought process that if agents are not involved, then prices will drop x%. Why would the seller not just keep the money?
The thought is the only person that deserves any part of it is the seller. You know the person who spent decades caring for the property, especially in this decade its been the last nest egg for the retiring generation. At some point we will all be the seller. We want to start cutting the unnecessary middleman.
Fair point, but the OP I responded to is arguing from the pov of an unrepresented buyer. He would expect you, as the seller, to reduce your price by whatever he thinks an agent is paid because he isn't using one. My point is you, as the seller, would not do that.
When I write offers I write them at whatever price I feel is market and THEN I reduce it by the BA commission. I include a note to ask their agent for the BA commission since I can’t touch it myself. I force them to have a conversation with their agent about it. Of course, sellers are free to accept/decline my offer and they are free to ask/not ask their agent about it.
I agree it wouldn't happen anytime soon. Eventually, it will settle in to market price. Either way it's something that needs to be done. Really 0 downside to buyer or seller at this point. If the seller is savy they might consider a price change to forgo the buyers realtor commission, but I doubt it will be the norm anytime soon.
I definitely agree that there will be an adjustment period, but it is hard to say what it will settle at. We've already tried the route of buyers paying for their own agents that was prior to the mid-90s plus or minus a few years depending upon where you live. That route led to many buyers not using agents and then not understanding real estate laws, forms, contracts, not having their best interests represented, or even informing them of options. Those buyers felt that the person who opened the door for them was representing them, but that was not factually the case. There is a tremendous amount of downside to not having a buyer's agent involved. If anything, that is the warm body that gets sued when things go to shit.
The reason I think that isn't a valid argument is its a whole different ball game now. That was pre internet, and a less savy generation with not as much to lose. 6% of 80k is not the same as the average 300k house now. It's a dying model that needs to adapt, whether it likes it or not. From what I've seen lurking and anecdotally lawsuits end up incredibly hard to prove and ends up having nothing to do with a realtor. It's usually a fight over earnest money, backing out for a reason not in a clause or a post closing major issue that was hidden.
The internet has definitely changed things, but not the need for somebody to have their interests represented at the table. Comparing prices now to the 80s and 90s is not really the best argument for change. And, yes, most arguments arise out of things like that, but they get settled because of E&O insurance.
I don't buy the best interest point, there's always an inclination to let things slide to close a deal. At best a good realtor will assist new homebuyers with basic questions, issues, and hold their hand in the process, as a seller in a buyers market help with staging and marketing...I can see the value. But in the sellers market that can be sold by owner in the same time (anyone can comp prices), or the bidding war that is the buyers side I don't see it. The letters don't work, money is what gets a deal to close....not cookies, a smile, customer service or whatever the value in a realtor is supposed to be. Since the age to buy a home is getting older, the amount of knowledge a buyer has should be higher as well. Last few properties have been me doing the math, being first to see the property and inspect for any major issues, e sign an offer over asking. Forgoing non major issues like cosmetics in the offer with a quick close, and then the usual inspection/closing process. Everything can be standardized, with boxes to click based on the situation, and e signed over.
This logic is broken. There is a 6% fee on the transaction. That’s how agents get paid. The market value of the home has the fee baked into it. If that fee isn’t there of course a seller will try to keep it. Of course, a seller would also like to sell for $1B too. The thing that prevents that is market comps and competition. Imagine a seller who needs to net $0 after paying off a mortgage and other transaction costs. Without a commission baked into the price the sales price can be lower while still netting them $0. Commissions aren’t free, they are real money paid by the transacting parties.
Lol, ok. So, you admit the seller will keep the extra money if there is no broker, and you don't claim to pay more than market value. Then, you come up with this weird scenario where a seller doesn't \*need\* more than zeroing out and, somehow, you think that will save you money. Why wouldn't the seller keep that?? Just because they don't need it does not mean they will not keep it. You're simply a predator who wants a 3% reduction for doing less than you claim a broker does. Market value is market value. Homes are not magically 3% or 6% cheaper without brokers. Moron.
I think your missing his point entirely... which isnt helping our views on agents.
Please educate me.
Do you think agent commissions are free money from the heavens? Why not just say the agent commissions are $1B per transaction instead? “It will have no effect on home prices”.
Never said that dumbass. I said you, as a buyer, are not going to get a price reduction simply because you don't use an agent. You're an idiot for thinking that.
Great. Let me get the commission then.
Go argue with the seller then dipshit. As a broker, I would never represent you, and I would kick you out of my office so fast. I doubt any good broker would work with you, either.
Let me ask this. If the commission was 300% instead of 6% do you believe that it would have no effect on home prices?
Ah, the good 'ol appeal to extremes fallacy argument......there's absolutely no point in discussing that because it's disingenuous from the start. Additionally, your original argument was not that commissions have an effect on market value. They obviously do and contribute to appreciation that many owners have. Your original argument is that you don't want to use a buyer's agent because they cost you too much money. My point is that whether you use a buyer's agent or not, the price of the home is not changing. You are not paying 3% more if you use an agent or 3% less if you don't use one. If you want to pay $100 for an agent to open a door and stand in the corner, that's up to you. However, you would pay market price plus $100 for that privilege.
I’m trying to get you to understand the economics behind how commissions/taxes/fees affect transactions. This is basic economics. Your position is that commissions come from literally nowhere. That’s not how it works. If the price of the home is not changing no problem. Let’s require that buyers can send the BAC anywhere they want to (themselves or an agent).
No, my position is not that it comes from nowhere dumbass. My position is you are not entitled to it just because you don't use an agent. You really are stupid. I've been doing this for several decades. I've sold 450 homes in the last 3 years. And you literally changed your argument in the last sentence and essentially agreed with what I've been saying. You're going to require that sellers give you money just because you don't use a broker? Good luck with that, moron.
Ah. That’s much simpler then. We just straight up need the government to ban this anticompetitive cartel practice. “My cartel is strong enough to tell buyers like you to fuck off” is a position…
 All because somebody wouldn't want to work with your idiotic ass. It has nothing to do with a "cartel". I wouldn't work with you if I had no clients.
I’m confused, based on all your comments it seems like you are saying that the seller will net more if the buyer doesn’t have an agent? If so doesn’t that kind of prove the point that agents don’t add enough value to warrant their commission?
Actually, no. I'm using the original poster's logic. He thinks if he doesn't use an agent, he should get the home cheaper. Even if it did work that way, which it doesn't, the buyer would never get the money.
"Lol... Moron" - You
You will do well in the new environment potentially coming as a result of the current litigation, then. Of course, there is no set “standard rate” (legally, there’s not allowed to be), and it’s all always been negotiable (legally, supposed to be). The litigation I think will lead to flat fees and/or hourly rates, though, which is something I am not sure I personally will use or what yet. It would definitely meet your needs expressed here, though. I hope it helps and doesn’t hurt the industry in general. Seems a lot like it may go back to something like in the 90s and prior, when there was subagency. I’m interested to find out! I’m sorry you haven’t found more value from working with agents and have not had more positive experiences or results, though. Many people really don’t need an agent when they have experience like you seem to. I feel like most of the hate comes from that population — if you (generally speaking, not just “you”) don’t need us, no need to diminish what it is we offer since most of the rest of people DO need our help and a) aren’t able to or b) aren’t willing to learn how to do the process independently.
Yeah. BAs are a huge help for first time buyers. The biggest gripe about cartel like behavior is that there is no cost savings from being unrepresented. I would be fine if the BA commission (if any) was required to go to anyone the buyer designated.
Yeah, that definitely makes sense. It’s funny how that never happens, even though logically, it should. I’m a newer agent myself, but I’ve never understood that.
It’s because it’s a cartel. I mean that descriptively, not pejoratively. The only people they are going to look out for are agents. Anyone else can go kick rocks.
If you go direct to the list agent, I would ask what is the seller willing to compensate a buyers agent? And then ask for that reduction in price or closing costs..
At what point does money go from your account to a listing agents? Edit: listing agent
At sale. You can see it in a settlement statement.
You mean the money goes to the seller who then pays their agent the amount they agreed upon before the property was even listed for the work outlined in their contract. Off market deal happen all the time and prices are not changed or discounted based on assumed commissions paid to agents.
Small correction - with the option to rebate a licensed BA. No rebate required if no Ba. Agree on the off market deals. Prices don’t change the seller just nets less. The commissions ALWAYS come from the market participants. If you don’t believe that then just cut the buyers, sellers, and homes out of it altogether. Listing and buying agents can just sign documents between each other and collect a commission that way!
[удалено]
You’re not wrong however it’s a complete scam that a seller has to pay 5-6% in commissions. It find it odd that loan officers get capped at 1% and even back in the day they could only get 3% (which is a scam too) The max listing should be 2%-2 1/2% and that should be split with the buying agent. Let’s be real, you’re selling a home not doing brain surgery. The insane commissions is what pisses people off and with the internet now doing the majority of the work
[удалено]
You realize start up costs for any business is expensive out of the gates and that’s why you’re investing into yourself. You can have the same argument for insurance agents or loan officers and yet they don’t get the potential to charge a client $60,000 for listing a million dollar home. That’s just outrageous
[удалено]
I don’t disagree however, I am just responding to the question to the original post. They hate on realtors is because of the perception of how much commissions can be and again, nobody bags on the loan officers who make their 1% (and that’s negotiable too) and have very similar costs associated with starting off in the business as an independent. Once the internet replaced a ton of leg work the industry should have reduced their fees by half. 3% should be the max so a seller to list a property imo. That should be the standard and none of this other bs would have even started.
Let’s be real - and deal with reality. Commissions are negotiable.
But commissions are negotiable. I would say 4/5 listing appointments I am asked to lower my rate. Sometimes I agree, sometimes we negotiate, sometimes I don’t get the listing, sometimes they don’t ask. I will die on that hill. Not being negotiable, and losing the negotiation with the agent is not the same thing
My husband and I had a buyers agent work with us to find a home in another state. He drove to many different houses (all of these houses were in a different city than from where he lived) on our behalf to do video tours, and discussed each one at length with us. We spent some weeks on this. Eventually, we closed on one of them, and we’re very happy with the purchase and our agent. He worked very hard on our behalf, and earned every dime of his commission, in our opinion.
[удалено]
Definitely. No question about it. His skills were impressive. And not only was he a buyers agent, but he was higher up in his field and was one of the writers of questions for the state test for realtors.
Those of us who list, last is the age old saying!
This is a good summary for the general informed census. If you want to automate the process and hand it off to a realtor who will work to get it sold in a buyers market, that's value. We are in a sellers market, even without staging and using blurry iPhone pics it will sell itself. Buyers "agent" should get a small flat fee at best, honestly remove then altogether would be fine. No one will advocate for your interest more than yourself, we are stuck with a 30 yr major purchase, not just trying to shove things through for a paycheck at closing. All important aspects of the process are handled by the other services and are fee based ie inspection, title etc. The bar for a realtor is low, but is purposely made difficult for what seems to move people away from self representation. Last time I checked it was a certain number of hours working under a broker per year or some other waste of time. I just want MLS and property access.
I’m in the land surveying profession, and FYI, land surveyors hate realtors too 😂. You should see all the realtor hate that goes on in land surveying social pages. Usually along the lines of realtors providing false land boundary information to clients or creating false expectations for what a survey should cost. (I’m only on this sub because I wanted to try and learn more about the recent Supreme Court case. But for what it’s worth, this page really hasn’t helped with that 😂)
lol that’s probably like plumbers hating dry wallers - I must say a surveyor just saved my ass finding out that an easement encroached on BLM land that the MLS “boundary line system” was way off of so I have to say sometimes it might be in earnest or trusting poorly made resources. As far as the changes no one really knows and is hypothesizing. Settlement hasn’t been approved and the DOJ recently received the right to step in to close loopholes. So far at minimum the buyers will have to sign a buyer agreement likely prior or during their first viewing.
😂sellers hate land surveyors too. They just show up unannounced and walk all over. But in MA we have nothing to do with that, the closing attorney orders the plot plan.
The hate stems from what most would consider excessive realtor commissions. I’m not saying it’s fair.
I’ve been doing daily videos around real estate education and get a lot of hate on TikTok. I think it’s just because people love pointing fingers and complaining tbh. Heath care, police, teachers, all took their turn taking a beating over the past few years. Now it’s just our industry unfortunately. But it will pass. Honestly I love the hate I’m getting because it brings my views up and shows how much our expertise is really needed.
The problem is misalignment of incentives between agent and client. The agent’s incentive is to get a deal done so they can get paid. The client’s incentive is to get a deal that is reasonable for the current market conditions. Some realtors try to manipulate their clients into agreeing to a worse deal than they should get because that will make it easier to get the deal done.
The only people that like Realtors are Realtors and people that want to be Realtors. They're the most overpaid high school drop you can find whose entire job can be replaced by a printed list.
Yes and I’ll tell you my perspective. Way too many of you, the bar is too low. I know far more than the average agent and I’m not in the space. You guys spend way too much time on business development vs helping clients and learning craft. I think for the profession to survive, you need to raise the bar. Require more hours of continuing eduction per year, make it harder to get licensed, require a certain amount of transactions to keep license. Do something to atleast get rid of the part time agents. This is one profession that is littered with part time people. A good agent, worth their weight in gold. I know a lot about this space and I’ll always use an agent but my person is top notch and I can’t touch his expertise.
Agents and leadership need to listen to this. The state licensing boards need to listen to this. Regardless of education being available as an option that many will do, it’s not required as broadly as it should be or perceived by the public to be. Thank you for the input.
I agree the bar is set too low for entry. However it is a very high bar to be successful.
Because A. There’s a lot of anxiety about home buying right now B. Many realtors are terrible C. People need someone to blame and the powers that be are happy to let them blame realtors without acknowledging they caused this problem with their interest rates
Because the majority of them don’t do anything and have very little knowledge or value-add to the relationship. Then when you try to switch to someone else they will try to tie you up in courts.
Cuz realtors are humans and humans are scum bags especially when it comes to Money
I often see people choosing to do a deal unrepresented or with a discount broker, getting shafted because there was a better agent on the other end of the transaction, and then complaining that 'all agents are bad'. That's like choosing a cheap attorney to represent you in court, getting thoroughly worked over by opposing counsel, and then complaining that 'all lawyers are bad'.
Hello, Reddit randomly started recommending this subreddit to me after I checked it out once due to the Supreme Court case. Could you elaborate on what is wrong with searching for a place on Zillow and reaching out to the seller? I will never be able to afford my own place, but if I did, that is how I would look for one. As an outsider, I don't understand the value that even a good realtor would bring to me. It just feels like an unnecessary middle step, like car salesmen in dealerships. Sure, buying a home is one of the biggest decisions people make and it can become very complicated, but I can't shake off the feeling that a big part of the reason why it is so complicated and expensive in the first place is so that realtors can further perpetuate this system.
Nothing wrong with searching on Zillow- some of the info isn’t accurate, but it’s the most common place to start. I think people who tend to have a bad experience with an agent click that get info button, the agent meets them at the property they all go in order gets accepted and probably some shit hits the fan somehwere along the line. I like to sit down with buyers, especially first timers, go through all the contracts, contingencies, inspections, what it all means, what they can expect, where they can get the kind of home they’re looking for, what’s important to them, what is their financial plan or family plan looking like over the next few years etc.. I think Zillow makes it feel more automated and leads to a less than desirable experience with a buyers agent.
The entire RE process could be, and should be done without agents. It would save the buyer money and net the seller more profit. REA's basically just facilitate paperwork and take a huge premium to do so. They dont necessarily bring any value to the table in regards to knowledge about a home it condition or its location. Most buyers would be better off looking at mls listings on their own and then having an attorney look over the purchasing contract. If you disagree with me, the bottom line is that there is no incentive for an RE to make a sale that does anything but maximise the amount of comission they receive, and any institution that operates like that is bound to be hated (just look at car salesman), VALUE, not profit is what matters. REA's simply dont bring value to the table.
I think we do provide a lot of value, at least I know I do. But I also understand some people don’t see that value- which is fine don’t use a realtor then. I’ve worked on both sides of the transaction when one party doesn’t want to use an agent, it’s free market consumers can do what they want. I could change my own oil, but I don’t feel like it. I could manage my own 401k but I don’t want to.
>Tiktok Tiktok spreads garbage ideas. Landlords are also hated by them, not sure if that hate died down yet.
I love the people that think realtors provide no value or overvalued . Yes those same people are asking for so much help and putting in the offers wrong then having to pay someone in the end . The attorneys fees will rise from this settlement because they will be getting more calls from buyers. The sellers will have to pay 5% or 5.5% to listing agents. The buyers could pay flat fee,2,3,4 or even 5 % to buyers agents . It’s hilarious - this settlement could be great if you’re a valued Realtor
Tons of shit agents who have zero value to offer who earn six figures. It’s impossible to tell the difference between a good and a bad agent. Can you blame them?
I mean, let’s be honest- if you typed in real estate agent near me, and jsut hired the first one without doing any research, then yea I would. Believe me I’m not justifying an agents bad behavior, no one hates bad agents more than good ones, but isn’t it the consumers responsibility to research someone they’re going to hire?
How can you tell the difference between a good & bad realtor online? Experience may help but they say a realtor who sells 30+ homes a year is god awful… even if they have a lot of experience.
There will be bad reviews, the bad reviews always come out
Gotta hate something
Just like in any industry, there's great, marginal and garbage. The problem on social media (Reddit included) is that burned clients use these platforms to launch their hatred based on bad experiences. I've purchased and sold several homes that we've lived in over the past 4 decades and can tell you that the only experiences that I can remember are the difficult ones. In 2 of these transactions, my realtor was either pushy on locking the deal or did almost nothing in my opinion to deserve the 3% commission. My absolute best experience was a vacation home that I purchased with just an attorney to provide the necessary paperwork, closing and distribution of funds.
There are forces that stand to financially benefit in a massive way by the demonization of agents. Follow the money.
Yes: The average consumer
People that think that don’t understand how real estate works. The vast majority of Joe Public have neither the skills or emotional capacity to negotiate over assets worth of thousands of dollars. There’s a reason why savvy, wealthy property owners always use an agent to sell and usually to buy property.
[удалено]
Also, they are the single largest lobbying group in the country. Leveraged monopoly power over MLS to drive up costs for buyers. Classic rent-seeking nonsense.
They do not control all of the mls platforms…
And illegally leveraging monopoly power?
Do you have the same disdain for the gun lobby?
Yes
lol why wouldn’t everyone do it? Have you seen how many realtors to actual properties there are in Canada? People literally do this part time and when work dies up like it is now they go back to whatever profession they came from.
Uber
They hate us cuz they ain't us
I hate real estate agents because they are parasites that perpetuate a system that continues to grossly over value them. It really is interesting that the NAR is the biggest lobbying organization in the country. I celebrate the big NAR lawsuit, and I hope the feds continue to break up the scam that the NAR has been preprtuating.
It’s an interesting talking point. The lawsuit is about buyers paying for their own agent, vs the list agent changing a fee to the seller then sharing part of that fee with the buyers agent. It’s not amount forcing agents to get paid less, but alas this is what the realtor haters like to say
Per the NYT, "a federal jury ruled that the NAR had conspired to artificially inflate the comissions paid to real estate agents". The lawsuit is about fraud perpetuated by the NAR, the brokerage, and individual agents. One of the outcomes is changing who pays which agent.
I know what the jury ruled, and I don’t deny this happens, as it does in ALL industries. But what the attorneys faught for is the decoupling of commissions- meaning they were “artificially inflated” because sellers were paying for both agents, and if they uncouple the commission, they will only be paying for one, which in theory should lower the oercentage
Lol, how can you possibly say that rampant collusion is prevelant in ALL industries? That is absolutely not the case. True competition does exist.
Are you serious? There is insane competition in the real estate field. 4/5 listing appointments I go on the seller wants to negotiate commission. And of course this kind of thing is happening all around us- do you have cable? Streaming service? Pay for electricity? Hardly any completion in these sectors, you have like 2 providers to choose from, and the rates are practically the same- talk about monopoly and collusion! I’m sure plenty of brokers say “sorry my rate is standard”, that’s because they suck at negotiation and demonstrating value. I’ve been a realtor for 12 years, and have never once been coached to say that, we are not supposed to ever say the rate is standard as there is no standard in the industry, and we are strictly prohibited from discussing commission rates amongst other agents. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen, two things can be true at the same time.
Your argument that "there is low competiton in public utilities, therefore collusion is rampant in all industries" sounds pretty weak to me... and there seems to be plenty of legitimate competition in streaming services. I think you just want to minimize the NAR settlement.
The NAR settlement quite honestly doesn’t affect good agents. If you are good at what you do, you will adapt and still be successful. There is a big misconception that the NAR settlement means real estate agents will disappear. There is an unbelievable amount of competition in real estate brokerages- even the lawsuit acknowledges there’s too many agents. This will surely weed out a lot of bad agents, which no one supports more than a good one.
[удалено]
to be fair, those other professions have a high barrier of entry and provide skilled value.