Tradelite,
I have followed this thread as a lurker for some months and for the most part agree with your perspective and experience. I am a 15 year residential agent in Seattle and have had some success(last 7 or 8 years commissions well into 6 figures). I believe the duck and dodge Elroy is referring to is the bane of the industry. Once or twice a year I am aware of a "deal" that the listing agent either quickly sells himself(usually an experienced desk fee agent) or is sold in house without exposure to the general public(usually a lesser producing agent mesmerized by a less than honorable broker). These are deals that are something below market value where the seller/bagholder is left with a sack somewhat lighter than it should be and the double(commission) dealing agent has a list of reasons the seller benefited; ie. quick sale, qualified buyer, every agent does it etc.. These reasons come under the heading of SPECIOUS LOGIC. Specious logic is not the sole provenance of attorneys as some may think but is practiced by all to some degree and, of course, to a greater degree directly proportional to the amount of money involved. Excuse my rambling digressions.
The truth is: the seller always benefits financially from full exposure to the market.
<<Elroy...consider this.
And it actually happens all the time.
It's Tuesday sales meeting day at one of the largest and most successful brokerage offices in town (such as the one where I worked for many years).
At the meeting, all agents have an opportunity to discuss their new listings, both those officially listed and about to be listed. One or more agents in office KNOW their buyer-clients or buyer-customers will be interested in seeing that house. Of course, they get in first.
Remember, the seller has already been told the range of potential value of his home. He might get an offer from one of these in-house people first, but will he take it?
Not necessarily.....because his agent will tell him that the competing brokerages now have an offer they have to beat. Seller wins with multiple contracts and eventually a much better contract to accept.>>
I believe your describing something that involves full exposure to the market. I may well be that you and Elroy actually agree.
<<Besides all this, consider the fact that many sellers don't even want their homes listed in the MLS--agents have to argue with them about the advantages in order to get them to do it. Some sellers pick a brokerage firm and DEMAND that the firm sell the listing itself. Sellers don't always relish the idea of hundreds of buyers traipsing thru their homes--they want the place sold, yesterday, with a minimum of hassle.>>
I have occasionally encountered this perception but find it is usually based on misunderstanding of the process. The old days before multiple listing services when a conspiracy existed that essentially disallowed the public access to information and even competing brokerages were not aware of what other brokerages had listed made for this type of sale. It's easy enough to limit public access to a home only to legit buyers through appointment only or appointment through listing agent and still get sufficient exposure to the market.
Again, I find your posting informative and am in general agreement with most of what you say. I do think it is possible under some very unusual circumstances for a private sale utilizing re agent services to occur but most of those I witness are driven by less than honorable intentions.
Tam |
