
Could be the end of real estate buyers agents - wndoom
https://notorious-rob.com/2019/03/gotterdammerung-a-very-serious-legal-threat/
======
stevep98
Buyers agents get paid more if the home sells for more. They should be
incented to drive the price down for the buyers, not up.

Even so, it’s really better for any agent to accept the first reasonable
offer, close it out and as quickly as possible move on to the next house. They
are not incented to drag the sale on to get a better deal for the party they
represent.

~~~
jjeaff
The real incentive is the latter one you mentioned. Buyers aren't going to
care about driving the price up to get a bigger commission. The potential hit
to their reputation probably wouldn't be worth it.

But they definitely are incentivized to get a sale done asap.

This is the same reason your selling agent isn't really incentivized to get
you the highest price possible. The small increase in fees isn't worth
forgoing the money that could be in your pocket now.

------
someguydave
Restricting home sales listings to realtors is anti-competitive behavior. They
have gotten away with it because they are politically powerful.

However, fashions change and it does seem that high home prices have become a
real issue today.

~~~
jjeaff
Listing a hike isn't restricted though. You can still list online at places
like Zillow and Craigslist. Signage as well. You are just restricted from
their private MLS.

Of course even then, there are online brokers that will list you in the MLS
for a flat fee. I think I paid $250 to put my house on the MLS when I sold
without an agent.

------
FireBeyond
Just as egregious, many contracts require the agent to be the member of a
realtor organization to get the commission, and if not, both commissions are
required to go to the seller agent.

So if you utilize nobody, or a skilled acquaintance, you can find that the
seller is legally prohibited from paying the commission (that I agree is just
as insidious).

~~~
shostack
That seems like something you may have a decent chance or redlining,
particularly if it is a competitive offer, no?

------
bishopknight
Yeah it always seemed odd to me that we have to pay the "buyers" commission
when we are selling "our" home... crazy

------
supermw
Don’t these cases come up all the time and nothing ever comes from it?

Also, it’s hard to see sellers as getting ripped off when the buyers agent fee
is factored into the price. If there was no fee included you would expect to
see a drop in price, and this is what happens when a buyer purchases a home
without an agent.

~~~
URSpider94
Most contracts state that if there’s no buyer’s agent, then the seller’s agent
gets all the commission. So, no discount.

~~~
jjeaff
But is that a requirement? Or can I negotiate that with my agent before I sign
on?

~~~
URSpider94
In some states, a buyer must be represented by a Realtor. If the buyer has no
representation, then generally what happens is that the seller's Realtor
nominally represents the buyer as well (dual agency). If you were to try to
negotiate to not pay the commission, then your Realtor would probably refuse
to represent the buyer, and they might not be able to close.

~~~
dragonwriter
The requirement is almost certainly for a real estate agent licensed by the
state, not a Realtor®, which is a registered trademark of a particular trade
association for it's members.

~~~
URSpider94
Yes, you are absolutely right, and I'm aware of the trademarking of the
Realtor name - that's an interesting story in its own right, and a very
interesting approach to regulatory capture. I was just looking for statistics
to find out how many people are licensed real estate professionals but not
Realtors, but I couldn't find the number -- I'm betting not many. Since we are
picking nits -- many states have a different licenses -- agents vs. brokers --
but both can be Realtors. Here's a good link for people who aren't in the
know: [https://www.frameworkhomeownership.org/blog/broker-vs-
agent?...](https://www.frameworkhomeownership.org/blog/broker-vs-
agent?gclid=Cj0KCQjwjpjkBRDRARIsAKv-0O2Lktssz673mf-15maXupZ11vSLyRybkvYqgyEyD0rbuMH7VzGrv0IaAqVQEALw_wcB)

------
pascalxus
Cant you just use one of those services that'll sell your home for a flat fee?
then you don't need to pay the buyers agent, right?

~~~
URSpider94
In those services, you often end up paying most of the money you pay to the
buyer’s agent. Otherwise, the house won’t get listed in MLS, and nobody will
see it.

~~~
jjeaff
You can list on Zillow or Craigslist, maybe redfin, etc. I paid a $250 flat
fee to list my fsbo on the MLS. I advertised that I would work with buying
agents because I heard that agents will tend to not tell their clients about
your house since they may not get a commission.

I ended up selling to a buyer without an agent who saw the sign. But my
understanding was that if a buyer approached me I could have told them no
commission and they could have proceeded as they wish.

~~~
URSpider94
That's definitely true. The question to ask (and I mean quantitatively, not
rhetorically -- economists can gather data on this) is whether paying a
Realtor 6% nets you more profit on the sale, e.g. whether a house listed on
MLS and marketed well sells for 6% more (or sells significantly faster, such
that the cost of capital nets you some gain). I expect that it depends heavily
on the local market dynamics.

------
jdsully
Would be really good for RedFin if this succeeds.

