[candacev]

Originally Posted by Plinker

If the new ruling is finalized, would you refuse to accept a listing if the seller offers you 3% and makes it clear they will not pay any buyer agent fees?

I would not take a listing if the seller is adamant that they will not pay a buyer's agent. Why? I think you will find that at least 80% of buyers do not have the excess funds to pay compensation on top of down payment, closing costs etc. Think about a VA buyer that is entitled to insured 100% financing with no down payment required. This will limit who can buy the property. Why would I spend at least $1000 up front of my personal money in marketing, photos etc if I know that the buyer pool is automatically reduced? Our buyer broker agreements will give the buyer the choice of if they want to see a home or not if that property is not offering buyer agent compensation. It certainly will be interesting to see how this all plays out. By the way, the local MLS here is requiring the buyer broker agreements now as of Aug 7th. Nevertheless, this is our new reality.

[BostonTom]

Required really people will just start going to open houses or contacting the listing agent. No buyers are going to pay buyers agents 2.5. Do you really think that the seller is going to pay the 5% or 6% when they can pay 2.5. there will be plenty of agents willing to accept the 2.5%. and complete the transaction. The consumers are in the driver seat they have options. Realtors care about what is best for them the commission not what's best for other realtors. There will be a MLS realtor within the Villages who will start listing house at 2.5 percent running open houses accepting offers right from the buyers which will put the other realtors in a position were they will have to do the same if they want to stay in the business.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by candacev

By the way, the local MLS here is requiring the buyer broker agreements now as of Aug 7th. Nevertheless, this is our new reality.

Write this down, so you can refer back to it, in 3-5 years.

NAR and their MLS is a dinosaur and this settlement is going to put them out of business. Already, many of the largest brokerage offices in the USA have signed settlement agreements and changed their structure, so Brokers are no longer require to belong to NAR and be REALTORS®.

NAR killed the golden goose, by being greedy.

[candacev]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

Write this down, so you can refer back to it, in 3-5 years.

NAR and their MLS is a dinosaur and this settlement is going to put them out of business. Already, many of the largest brokerage offices in the USA have signed settlement agreements and changed their structure, so Brokers are no longer require to belong to NAR and be REALTORS®.

NAR killed the golden goose, by being greedy.

Agreed

[candacev]

Originally Posted by BostonTom

Required really people will just start going to open houses or contacting the listing agent. No buyers are going to pay buyers agents 2.5. Do you really think that the seller is going to pay the 5% or 6% when they can pay 2.5. there will be plenty of agents willing to accept the 2.5%. and complete the transaction. The consumers are in the driver seat they have options. Realtors care about what is best for them the commission not what's best for other realtors. There will be a MLS realtor within the Villages who will start listing house at 2.5 percent running open houses accepting offers right from the buyers which will put the other realtors in a position were they will have to do the same if they want to stay in the business.

Agents will be able to have open houses and people will be able to tour. However, once the discussion starts about price or the negotiating, that buyer will have to sign a Buyer's Broker agreement. Example: My listing agreement with the seller as a transaction broker in Florida is x%. The seller agrees that if another agent brings a buyer I am able to split that compensation however the seller and I agree to in our listing agreement. The buyer's brokerage agreement in that case would say lets say whatever 1/2 of what that x% is. The buyer's brokerage agreement states that we are transaction brokers as well. I work for the transaction to make the transaction work for both parties. That is the goal. Yes, I would receive the total x% because I am not splitting it with another broker since the buyer was procured from the open house I am hosting. The buyer would not be paying it, because I am disclosing to that buyer that the seller has agreed in our listing agreement. This is the same way it has worked for a very long time. It really is not changing. It is just being more transparent.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by candacev

Agents will be able to have open houses and people will be able to tour. However, once the discussion starts about price or the negotiating, that buyer will have to sign a Buyer's Broker agreement. Example: My listing agreement with the seller as a transaction broker in Florida is x%. The seller agrees that if another agent brings a buyer I am able to split that compensation however the seller and I agree to in our listing agreement. The buyer's brokerage agreement in that case would say lets say whatever 1/2 of what that x% is. The buyer's brokerage agreement states that we are transaction brokers as well. I work for the transaction to make the transaction work for both parties. That is the goal. Yes, I would receive the total x% because I am not splitting it with another broker since the buyer was procured from the open house I am hosting. The buyer would not be paying it, because I am disclosing to that buyer that the seller has agreed in our listing agreement. This is the same way it has worked for a very long time. It really is not changing. It is just being more transparent.

Huh? If I go to an open house, and I make a cash offer to buy it, the only thing I will sign is a sales contract to buy the house for that price. Period. I don't care what the seller and the agent agree to between themselves.

[Plinker]

Originally Posted by candacev

I would not take a listing if the seller is adamant that they will not pay a buyer's agent. Why? I think you will find that at least 80% of buyers do not have the excess funds to pay compensation on top of down payment, closing costs etc. Think about a VA buyer that is entitled to insured 100% financing with no down payment required. This will limit who can buy the property. Why would I spend at least $1000 up front of my personal money in marketing, photos etc if I know that the buyer pool is automatically reduced? Our buyer broker agreements will give the buyer the choice of if they want to see a home or not if that property is not offering buyer agent compensation. It certainly will be interesting to see how this all plays out. By the way, the local MLS here is requiring the buyer broker agreements now as of Aug 7th. Nevertheless, this is our new reality.

I applaud you for defining the demographic of clients you will represent. You have every right to make this decision to exclude home sellers that choose not to pay a buyer’s commission. You are correct that there will be clients that are unable to come up with the funds to pay their buyer agent and will require the seller to pay them.

Many financial planners exclude clients that do not meet their minimums. It is common to find planners that demand at least one million dollars under management or far more. Perhaps there will end up being two types of selling agents.

The first type of selling agent would concentrate on buyers that do not have the funds to pay the buyer agent fee. This would appeal to first-time buyers and others that have yet to accumulate assets. This agent would charge 5-6% to the seller. The second type of agent would market their services to all home buyers and sellers regardless of financial status. These agents would custom tailor their fees to accommodate anyone who walks in the door, regardless if they be a seller or a buyer. I agree with other posts that there will be an abundance of selling agents that will agree to 2.5 if the seller refuses to pay the buyer agent fee.

It may not be long before agents realize that fee flexibility is the key to survival and prosperity.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by candacev

I would not take a listing if the seller is adamant that they will not pay a buyer's agent. Why? I think you will find that at least 80% of buyers do not have the excess funds to pay compensation on top of down payment, closing costs etc. Think about a VA buyer that is entitled to insured 100% financing with no down payment required. This will limit who can buy the property. Why would I spend at least $1000 up front of my personal money in marketing, photos etc if I know that the buyer pool is automatically reduced? Our buyer broker agreements will give the buyer the choice of if they want to see a home or not if that property is not offering buyer agent compensation. It certainly will be interesting to see how this all plays out. By the way, the local MLS here is requiring the buyer broker agreements now as of Aug 7th. Nevertheless, this is our new reality.

You would never get a listing from me.

[candacev]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

Huh? If I go to an open house, and I make a cash offer to buy it, the only thing I will sign is a sales contract to buy the house for that price. Period. I don't care what the seller and the agent agree to between themselves.

You will have to sign a buyers broker agreement or that agent will be heavily fined

[candacev]

Originally Posted by Plinker

I applaud you for defining the demographic of clients you will represent. You have every right to make this decision to exclude home sellers that choose not to pay a buyer’s commission. You are correct that there will be clients that are unable to come up with the funds to pay their buyer agent and will require the seller to pay them.

Many financial planners exclude clients that do not meet their minimums. It is common to find planners that demand at least one million dollars under management or far more. Perhaps there will end up being two types of selling agents.

The first type of selling agent would concentrate on buyers that do not have the funds to pay the buyer agent fee. This would appeal to first-time buyers and others that have yet to accumulate assets. This agent would charge 5-6% to the seller. The second type of agent would market their services to all home buyers and sellers regardless of financial status. These agents would custom tailor their fees to accommodate anyone who walks in the door, regardless if they be a seller or a buyer. I agree with other posts that there will be an abundance of selling agents that will agree to 2.5 if the seller refuses to pay the buyer agent fee.

It may not be long before agents realize that fee flexibility is the key to survival and prosperity.

Yes I agree there will be many that change their business plans.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by candacev

You will have to sign a buyers broker agreement or that agent will be heavily fined

Why would I care if the agent is fined? But, I would probably sign it as long as my offer terms and price didn't change. I certainly wouldn't increase my offer to pay an agent. Here is my offer, take it or leave it. If you are suggesting that I need to increase my offer to pay an agent, that will never work in the competitive marketplace.

[candacev]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

Why would I care if the agent is fined? But, I would probably sign it as long as my offer terms and price didn't change. I certainly wouldn't increase my offer to pay an agent. Here is my offer, take it or leave it. If you are suggesting that I need to increase my offer to pay an agent, that will never work in the competitive marketplace.

Unfortunately this will be our new normal. It will take a while to work out all the logistics, I am sure. But yes, the fines are ridiculous for not adhering to the new rules. And yes, by signing would not make any difference on what you are offering and willing to pay no big deal. I think many are looking at it like things are going to cost them more, but in reality, it is not. Just like any big change, until all the gears are well oiled, we will all have an adjustment period.

[Bay Kid]

Originally Posted by Normal

The agent, may make a modest living, but the real estate “AGENCY “ does very well for itself. Flat rates instead of percentages would be more fair for everyone. Not 60k for selling a million dollar home in a month.

Agent splits in a company are negotiated when they come to work for a company. A small company has many expenses and they only get 10 to 30% of the commission. They usually split the commissions with other companies. Agents and the company have lots of money and time invested into selling a home. There are times you must sell the property several times even to get paid. Sometimes you can work for a year on a property and never get paid. If you are lucky you will have an easy sale every now and then.

Don't forget all the times they give a home value to a seller only for the property to be listed with another company.

Flat tax rates would be good though.

[BrianL99]

Is there no emoji for "word salad" ?

[Blueblaze]

I don't see how signing an agreement with a salesman before I've seen the product benefits me in the least. It just looks like, once again, the big guy with the money and connections (the realtor's union) gets to rig the system to his benefit.

I have never signed an exclusive agreement with a realtor in my life. They don't like to admit it, but Realtor commissions have always been negotiable. I've had a realtor make up the difference between my firm offer and the seller's, out of their absurd commission, a couple of times. They're part of the deal, and if they're hungry enough, they'll chip in to make the deal work. They ought to do it more often than they do.

If I hire an agent beforehand, he ought to be my employee, working for a flat fee, not a cut of the deal. I built multi-million dollar software systems for my employers over a 40-year career that made my employers millions, but nobody ever offered me a percentage. The guy who sold it sure as hell got his cut. I have never understood why sales is treated like some rare talent, as if the ability to lie with a straight face was unusual among humans.