- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Do Realtors blackball houses not listed by Realtors?
Posted on 4/2/11 at 4:16 pm
Posted on 4/2/11 at 4:16 pm
I went the limited services route ($400 to get home listed on local MLS) and I'm not getting any traffic. I am offering 3% to buyers agents and at an asking price that is lower sq/ft than comps that sold within the last 6 months - one closing last week.
So do Realtors blackball these Brokers and only show to other full service Reatlors' homes? I'm at a loss why we are not getting traffic. I think it may be because of the active listing across the street screwing up the comps.
Pictures are fine and the two realtors that have looked at the house have mentioned they would ask more than we are currently.
Anyone give me an insider perspective?
So do Realtors blackball these Brokers and only show to other full service Reatlors' homes? I'm at a loss why we are not getting traffic. I think it may be because of the active listing across the street screwing up the comps.
Pictures are fine and the two realtors that have looked at the house have mentioned they would ask more than we are currently. Anyone give me an insider perspective?
10
Posted on 4/2/11 at 5:07 pm to sapo504
as a general rule, realtors will only take their clients to houses listed with a realtor. very rarely will a realtor voluntarily go to a FSBO house, only if the client requests a specific house.
Posted on 4/2/11 at 5:23 pm to sapo504
quote:
only show to other full service Reatlors' homes
This is typically the case because even if you are paying 3% to the buyer's agent you are still representing yourself as the seller. Most Realtors would rather deal with another agent representing the seller. Your professional dealings with the seller are exactly the same as a FSBO paying a buyer's commission.
Posted on 4/2/11 at 6:12 pm to madamsquirrel
quote:
Most Realtors would rather deal with another agent representing the seller
This makes sense. It isn't necessarily "blackballing", it's just that they'd rather deal with a pro who knows the ropes.
Posted on 4/2/11 at 6:23 pm to foshizzle
I'd say they are blackballing. The closing is pretty simple. A FSBO is taking away a commission from a fellow realtor or even themselves. If they show at the same rate as realtor supported houses, FSBO would quickly gain ground and before long most would solely use FSBO... and soon no one would even use a realtor, they would just go on line and search for the house they want. The only thing a realtor does for a seller is manage those entering your home so you are not robbed. Is that worth 3% of your homes value? doubtful.
Posted on 4/2/11 at 7:03 pm to C
First off, let me state that I am not a realtor, nor do I have any social/family association with realtors.
That said, it's my understanding that realtors do more than just "manage those entering your home". Mostly, it's a matter of making sure a transaction goes smoothly, including making sure all the forms are correct, the title is good, that their own client is a serious buyer (and that sellers are also serious), etc. etc.
Personally, especially in the higher priced markets I don't think this is necessarily worth the standard rate, but it is worth a substantial fraction of it. There is more to it than just going through a listing and driving clients around.
That said, it's my understanding that realtors do more than just "manage those entering your home". Mostly, it's a matter of making sure a transaction goes smoothly, including making sure all the forms are correct, the title is good, that their own client is a serious buyer (and that sellers are also serious), etc. etc.
Personally, especially in the higher priced markets I don't think this is necessarily worth the standard rate, but it is worth a substantial fraction of it. There is more to it than just going through a listing and driving clients around.
Posted on 4/2/11 at 8:37 pm to foshizzle
quote:
here is more to it than just going through a listing and driving clients around.
Correct and I was a bit simplistic in my cost/benefit approach. I think they do a good job, but it's not worth what they charge. Also, I think the "market" of realtors is over-saturated and only allowed to continue due to inflated costs from their "blackballing" and some key lobbying efforts to have friendly laws written to protect their practice.
It should just be a flat fee for the buyers agent and the sellers agent should get a slight bump due to the price of the home, but not 3%.
Posted on 4/2/11 at 9:12 pm to foshizzle
I did my last house sale FSBO with no Realtors on either side - was quick and painless for both of us. Even more so than the transaction for my last purchase with Realtors on both side. It really comes to the buyer and seller and if both show some flexibility.
Realtors do provide a good and worthwhile service - but a flat fee would be more appropriate in my opinion. It seems that if I want to sell my house I'll have to use one, however. Otherwise, they won't show it in a market with similar houses available. And it's technically not a FSBO - it's listed in MLS with a licensed broker that I paid a flat fee.
Realtors do provide a good and worthwhile service - but a flat fee would be more appropriate in my opinion. It seems that if I want to sell my house I'll have to use one, however. Otherwise, they won't show it in a market with similar houses available. And it's technically not a FSBO - it's listed in MLS with a licensed broker that I paid a flat fee.
Posted on 4/2/11 at 9:15 pm to sapo504
Perhaps they do blackball these listings. But selling agents (i.e. agents representing buyers) DEFINITELY DO refuse to show their clients a house where the stated commission for the selling agent is less than 3%. This is outrageously unethical, IMO.
Posted on 4/2/11 at 9:18 pm to Tiger JJ
quote:
This is outrageously unethical,
I think congress passed a bill preventing it from being illegal, which it should. anti-collusion laws.
Posted on 4/2/11 at 9:21 pm to sapo504
Perhaps you are asking too much for your home and/or have crappy photos up.
The mls directory is the driving force behind getting realtors traffic these days. Buyers look all that shite up on the internet and tell realtors which houses they want to look at.
The mls directory is the driving force behind getting realtors traffic these days. Buyers look all that shite up on the internet and tell realtors which houses they want to look at.
Posted on 4/2/11 at 9:25 pm to Things and stuff
I'm confident the price is at a good price point based on conversations with two agents who offered their services with plans to increase the price. However, that could be a ploy for them to get me under contract and then drop it.
The photos could be an issue - working to make improvements there. I hired a home stager to help with that, but not a professional photographer.
The photos could be an issue - working to make improvements there. I hired a home stager to help with that, but not a professional photographer.
Posted on 4/2/11 at 9:33 pm to sapo504
You don't need professional photos. You just need photos that don't suck. Some of the mls listings, when I was house shopping, were the worst photos I have ever seen in my life. Some listings would have 3 photos of a fricking shower curtain and 1 photo of a ceiling fan or something. I'd be like "WTF?" and just move on. Find the best camera you have. Get the widest angle, possibly by getting as far back on one side/corner as possible. Get the lighting as good as possible and try to capture a whole side of each room in the home. don't leave the viewer guessing.
If you have a home that isn't brand new, then here's what people assume. No pics of kitchen? Your kitchen probably sucks. No pics of the bathrooms? Then, they're probably jacked up.
Provide measurements of every room in the home. Describe how old your roof and a/c are. Throw the potential buyer a bone. There's lots of houses to sort through and I hated wasting my time on listings just because there wasnt enough info.
If you have a home that isn't brand new, then here's what people assume. No pics of kitchen? Your kitchen probably sucks. No pics of the bathrooms? Then, they're probably jacked up.
Provide measurements of every room in the home. Describe how old your roof and a/c are. Throw the potential buyer a bone. There's lots of houses to sort through and I hated wasting my time on listings just because there wasnt enough info.
Posted on 4/2/11 at 10:26 pm to foshizzle
quote:
That said, it's my understanding that realtors do more than just "manage those entering your home". Mostly, it's a matter of making sure a transaction goes smoothly, including making sure all the forms are correct, the title is good, that their own client is a serious buyer (and that sellers are also serious), etc. etc.
Much of this could easily be done by hiring a competent attorney. Title is pretty easy through a title attorney or title company, and I'd wager that very few agents could actually run title if their jobs depended on it. All the agent would do is hire the same title attorney or title company as the individual. Previous threads have covered this in depth on here, but basically hiring a real estate agent is for those who simply want the convenience of not doing the work themselves. Most real estate agents possess very few skills which are essential to the actual transactions. If paying 3%-6% for convenience is worth it to the buyer/seller than hiring a real estate agent might make sense. I'd wager that it is probable that agents would not make the same efforts to show houses listed FSBO versus houses listed by other agents.
This post was edited on 4/2/11 at 10:43 pm
Posted on 4/2/11 at 10:40 pm to sapo504
I wouldn't be surprised. I think that whole industry needs an overhaul.
Posted on 4/3/11 at 3:06 pm to sapo504
FSBOs can go smoothly in some cases. The issue comes in if there was a problem where the contract had to be enforced in court. Realtors have ironclad contracts based on schooling and experience. FSBOs usually have tons of holes in their contracts that they never realize because an issue never comes up. Also whoever stated an attorney and title company can legally handle everything for you is absolutely correct. But they also charge pretty hefty fees and most FSBOs are all about saving money. If a few more FSBO buyers went to court over things they legally could but do not realize people would think twice about just throwing a sign up in the yard.
Posted on 4/3/11 at 3:32 pm to madamsquirrel
quote:
Realtors have ironclad contracts based on schooling and experience. FSBOs usually have tons of holes in their contracts that they never realize because an issue never comes up.
I have bought and sold a few houses, with realtors and FSBO, both have their advantages. The contracts used by the realtors are pretty much "boiler plate", and similar contracts can be found online, or by asking a realtor for a copy of what they use, along with the phrase " I need it for my lawyer to go over, I may want to list a house with you".
Posted on 4/3/11 at 5:35 pm to JWS3
Anybody want to guess who the real estate agent is in this thread? 
Posted on 4/3/11 at 7:06 pm to foshizzle
quote:It's also garnering "action" on the listing. If a realtor can move a house in 30 days at asking price when FSBO requires >200 + negotiation, the realtor can pay for himself. Same for realtor vs realtor.
That said, it's my understanding that realtors do more than just "manage those entering your home". Mostly, it's a matter of making sure a transaction goes smoothly,
E.g., Homes in our area are high end. One realtor moves houses here much faster than his competition. At least that's his reputation. Needless to say, he does well for himself. Well enough to live in the neighborhood himself. 6% is damn expensive overhead -- up to ~$300K in this area, but if the property moves at a profit, it's all good. Right?
Still pisses me off. Probably shouldn't, but it's a lot of money!
This post was edited on 4/3/11 at 7:09 pm
Posted on 4/3/11 at 7:33 pm to sapo504
I always try to sell the home myself for the first 6 weeks. If there is a buyer stalking the neighborhood, I don't need to pay a commission for such an easy sale.
However, if within 6-8 weeks I haven't sold it, I list with an agent, ususally for 2% to listing broker, 3% to selling broker.
I am a Broker with full access to the MLS all the time; I'm not subject to a listing commission, but I will still list with other agents who do this full time.
However, if within 6-8 weeks I haven't sold it, I list with an agent, ususally for 2% to listing broker, 3% to selling broker.
I am a Broker with full access to the MLS all the time; I'm not subject to a listing commission, but I will still list with other agents who do this full time.
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News