Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bipin Prasad who wrote (27106)	3/31/1998 2:38:00 PM
From: Brian Fraser	Respond to of 132070

Bug: Yes, always use a buyer's agent when buying. If you're thinking of buying from owner, think again. The person who tries to sell a house without an agent is not thinking "g, i'll save some nice buyer the agents commission". More than likely, he's thinking "yep, I'll sell for the same money and keep that commission money myself. I might need it someday for the kid's college or something." At least that's what I thought once. Good luck Bipin's partner, please excuse the fact that the message is posted to you. thanks Mr. Partner.

To: Bipin Prasad who wrote (27106)	3/31/1998 8:32:00 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 132070

bipin, in 99% of markets you are correct. however, in the market i'm looking at housing inventories are down 75-80% compared to the average of the last 8 years. the amount of homes for sale is extremely limited. sellers negotiate a 4-5% commission and if a buyer's broker shows up that bumps to 6%. all else being equal, the sellers broker shows the home to his/her list of 10-15 pre-approved buyers and there is a 1-2% benefit to the seller to go with a seller's broker's buyer. i'm trying to find a fsbo where the owner saves 2.5-3% and i save the other half. hence, no buyer's broker. that's the logic, though it is a pain in the butt. i may go with a broker and i may not. it just depends.