The Bombshell Case That Will Transform the Housing Market
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 มิ.ย. 2024
- For decades, an invisible hand has been guiding and controlling the American real estate industry, dictating how much buyers and sellers pay to their agents and how homes are sold. A few days ago, after a stunning legal settlement, that control - wielded by the National Association of Realtors - collapsed.
Debra Kamin, who reports about real estate desk for The Times, explains how the far-reaching change could drive down housing costs.
Guest: Debra Kamin (www.nytimes.com/by/debra-kamin) , a reporter on real estate for The New York Times.
Background reading:
• The National Association of Realtors agreed to a landmark deal (www.nytimes.com/2024/03/15/re...) that will eliminate a bedrock of the industry, the standard 6 percent sales commission.
• Read about five ways (www.nytimes.com/2024/03/16/re...) buying and selling a house could change.
For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily (nytimes.com/thedaily?smid=pc-t...) . Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.
A quick search shows several sources saying the US is short between 3.2 and 6.8 million housing units, depending on who's estimating. Given the amount of hidden homelessness, like "van lyfers", New Yorkers living in storage units, couch surfers, etc I think we can safely round that up to 10 million. Maybe 20. So yeah, saving some of that 6% is nice, but housing cost is not a 6% problem, it's a 300% problem. Put the party balloons away and start building.
It will likely not only fail to lower home prices, but might actually make prices even higher by increasing profits for owners who sell, thereby incentivizing more speculators and flippers to enter the R.E. market because profits will be higher.
On top of that, the Biden administration has expanded and increased immigration. Good luck competing with the new demand.
If buyers have to come out of pocket for a Realtor's representation, along with their closing costs and downpayment, there will be fewer people able to buy for long time. This will not necessarily benefit Sellers if there are 70% fewer Buyers. But the large corporations buying up single-family homes all over the US, will love this.
You can include these fees in the mortgage. Lenders cover this.
Still better than "your" agent literally inventivized to pressure you to pay as much as possible and as fast as possible. Their incentive is completely aligned against you. Sellers agent I understand, it'sa signed with the seller. But a buyers agent, geez.
Housing prices won't go down, but the commission to real estate agents will definitely go down.
It's not going to be a big deal for housing prices, their is a fundamental shortage of 7 million homes this changes non of that..
LOL
I don’t see prices dropping. Agents aren’t going to work for free. Most homeowners don’t know where to begin to sell their homes. If they do FSBO, they won’t get as many eyes on their homes.
On a side note: Where I live consumer protection agency would have already taken them to the cleaners. The comission is 3 % (it can be less). And of course people can sell their homes privately.
Where do you live?
Why does the host make so many weird noises?
Hmmm!!!!
It sounds like both journalists are laughing at and enjoying an attack on an entire industry of self employed people largely comprised of women and minorities.
This is the first Daily episode that I’ve categorized as a list of sensationalized headlines that aren’t backed by fact and contained one point of view. There’s no inclusion of the defendants pov.
Interesting. I'm a realtor in the US and there was no such thing as a "standard commission" of 6%, nor was the commission amount necessarily split in half between the buyer's & seller's agents.
In real estate, everything is negotiable. 😊. NAR was like this creepy org that had no value to me as a real estate when I was first approached. "You have to be a member to refer to yourself as a Realtor!". Like it was some big deal. 13 yrs later, imagine all the fees I avoided bc I adhered to actual WA State Law with more stringent requirements. And lolz, no one even cares. 😂
Selling by owner is not as hard as realtors like you to think. Especially if you live in a desirable location.
Anyone who thinks this is going to reduce housing costs is, to put it politely, naive. To put it more honestly, they're gullible fools. Who will be the big winner? Lawyers. Lawyers have been lobbying for decades to put realtors out of business so that they can swoop in and do the work realtors do at much less cost than a slimy attorney will charge. Yes, their rates will go up, way up. Who else will benefit? Big corporations selling homes. And title companies will up their already hefty fees to make up for the work realtors used to do that title companies will now have to do. The price of a house will not drop a dime. Congrats, Mr. Attorney -- you've consolidated even further the power you and your scummy brethren have over all of us.
I guess in the future we will still have realtors, and most people won't pay lawyer rates to buy a house. I guess that the bigger point is the "not-quite-collusion" - in the past the buyer realtor and the seller realtor were both getting (usually) 3% each of the same price of the house. The realtors on both sides are motivated to put that closer to $400k than $300k.
Also I guess many people feel that their realtors are not putting in enough work or expertise to earn 3% of the transaction. In the future we might pay per hour for a realtor or get a contract with a certain number of hours estimated.
There are 27 states that require attorneys to work on transactions. Realtors are an additional fees to that. And those states don’t all have the highest prices. Or the lowest prices. So you are correct. Attorneys want in. And are also already in in addition.
SO much misinformation in this post
Real estate agent commissions have always been negotiable. Class action attorneys used to get 33% until about 10 years ago, and now they get 40% across the board on lofty sums. They’re fiduciaries who are supposed to operate in the best interests of their clients. Remind me, who is in fact colluding?
Also, to suggest housing prices are going to “go on sale” or drop because a small fraction of the value may not be part of the sell side cost is completely detached from the reality of supply and demand market economics. In other words a delusional assertion without fact.
Corporate Media Echo Chamber 1
Journalism 0
The guest covered this beat for a year and still didn’t get all the facts, nor had any regard for balance. If this is what reporting has come to, and we can have little faith in the fourth estate, what hope is there for democracy?
Some has to make a movie about this!
Please put me on a panel with these two.
Just the worst kind of lazy journalism.
please request it!
Great reporting Thank You very much 👏👏👏
I'll have to listen to this podcast, but my initial reaction is to wonder how removing this particular cost of selling a home might ever lower the cost for home buyers.
If, for example, some law reduced the broker fee in auctions, would that lower the amount of the winning bids, no matter which side--seller, buyer, or both--are responsible for paying that fee?
On the other hand, it's possible that the reduced fees in real estate transactions might remove an incentive for some kind of market manipulation by large R.E. brokerages that might have artificially been raising prices higher to create bigger fees for themselves.
I'll probably submit the transcript to A.I. for it to summarize this podcast for me, to see if the arguments presented are worth the time to read or listen to it in detail.
If I'm right, all this will do is mean more profit for owners who sell their homes.
If anything, it may even incentivize more speculators to enter the market because with lower fees, speculator profits will be higher.
With the additional speculators entering the market, the demand for houses will increase even more, and prices will continue to rise.
Once again, the "haves" win and the "have nots" lose.
As a contractor for my entire life, it was always tough to see a realtor pulling up in a new Mercedes or Cadillac and walk thru a jobsite like the Queen of England. Often, You could see a smirk on their faces, like look how hard these guys are working and Im making much easier and much more money.
Frankly, I'm looking forward to finally seeing realtors pulling up to my jobsite in a Toyota corolla.
The average income for a full-time agent is $30,000, not a lot.
@@wildflowerpower3859 Not in my town, 20 miles east of Manhattan, and what you stated is an national average.
Yes, many realtors are part time and I do question where the information is coming from and what the definition of full time is.
Is this self reported?
What percentage of realtors work out of choice? Meaning they are in a two income household.
NAR publishes an annual report disclosing that REALTORS make an average of $45k/year.
Your clients are hiring showey a-holes because they think looks are important. The actual real estate agents who work hard and make good money don’t need to drive nice cars to job sites and would not smirk at you because side you could be a potential client or source of referrals or someone who could help one of their clients build or renovate.
Amazing. What about the monopolies of health care… one system taking over an entire area and being a provider and an insurer so making money on both sides…..
Precisely! A professional organization cannot be a monopoly as they aren’t the ones generating or collecting revenue.
This is awesome, that lawyer and those 4 home sellers are like the "Erin Brokovich" of the housing market, they are heros !!!
lol and like the Lawyers of Erin Brockowich the lawyers will make the lions share. Guaranteed. More like “heroes” of their own bank accounts! Ha!
Those lawyers, they're only taking 30%.
Those sellers all bought with the help of a broker. All this has really done is leave buyers paying for the listing brokers commission through their purchase while getting nothing for it.
Not really.
Unfortunately, this time REALTORS are mostly individuals who don’t have college degrees, who make an average of $45k/year and who are women and or minorities. So this attack, by an attorney who can afford to work on contingency and will make hundreds of millions of dollars, is on people who you would route for. NAR publishes an annual report disclosing who their members are and how much money they make. They also lobby politically for the protection of home ownership for individuals. Not entirely for industry professionals.
Hate to break up the “party atmosphere” but there’s no evidence that this will be good at all for consumers.
Let’s look at some historical precedent:
Att breakup resulted in terrible quality phone service.
Airline “open skies” legislation dropped airline prices but also ushered in travel hell.
Are you a realtor.
When ZILLOW, COMPASS, or an actual big tech is the new MLS and there’s no centralized market place regulated by NAR, an entity with a code of ethics that is partially enforced by the MLS, prices will fall. Real estate won’t be a currency for any individuals. It’ll all be owned by corporations and reits and we’ll all live in slums. We won’t have a choice.
So what happens to the buyers who paid a higher price for their home to cover the fee the seller had to pay? Should that money be distributed half ways?
For clarification with sellers not having to pay 6%…we should start seeing sellers stop selling their home for maximum profit in the open market?
Maybe the seller can sell their house without paying 6%. Maybe they can pay their realtor a flat fee for 10 hours of work.
Maybe they can just had the buyer 3% of the current value of their home and watch them get through the transaction successfully but telling them how much they think their house in work and that there’s nothing wrong with it and that it’s beautiful and bigger than it looks or feels.
I don't believe prices will fall because of these changes as they have indicated and what is the upside for sellers if they do (commissions are lessened so the value drops proportionately because of it and they are in the same place as they were, silly)? Buyers determine what is paid for a property based on supply and demand. The fact that a commission will be lessened to a seller does not create a decrease in the value of the property. Commissions will undoubtedly be pushed down because of these changes but to what degree the commissions will be lessened is yet to be determined as there are many considerations. Many will be pushed out of the business and I am hopeful it will create a more competitive and professional environment for home sellers and buyers. There are things to be debated in this show though I agree with the underlying theme of anti-competitive practices. I have been in this business for 35+ years and I look forward to the changes that this will bring much of which will include greater transparency for all concerned.
Or less transparency. What’s to stop the sellers agents from offering to share commission with some agents and not to others? And is that a benefit or detriment to the seller?
Lenders regulate seller assist amounts so commissions will have to be paid off sheet. That eliminates transparency, broker oversight and increases opportunity for money laundering.
Always negotiate the 6%. And your terms is that they MUST sell at a price over what you could in order for them to absorb their fees. Plan your life where you don't have to sell; you WANT to sell. Allow time for you sell yourself first...lots of resources available to give you selling advice. Best advice is your neighbors. Basically, get everything repaired inside and out. Get your HOA involved. Paint. And hire a staging company. If you can't afford a staging company, make your home look like a hotel room. It's not rocket science.
Broker here; astounding to hear this discussion filled with so much bad information.
No kidding. Talk about mis-dis-mal information!
This is interesting but full of misinformation. Anybody can put a sign in their front yard and sell their home privately- without the NAR or a realtor. The NAR does not control lockboxes or access to homes. Also, the idea that sellers will reduce prices because of not having to pay a buyer’s commission is laughable. Prices are determined by market comps- they’re not going to take less. Also, commissions have always been negotiated and buyers/sellers are required to sign disclosures stating that they’ve been made aware of this. Most realtors set a fee less than 6% if they want a listing. Lastly, housing is usually a consumer’s largest investment. If they sell/buy themselves, there are a myriad of concerns they’ll have to be willing to handle.
Wow! Some good news, couldn’t have come at a better time :) thank you for sharing
What if Zillow bought your home?
If Zillow or Redfin or a big tech company becomes the new MLS and there’s no centralized market place regulated by an entity with a code of ethics, prices will fall. Real estate won’t be a currency for any individuals. It’ll all be owned by corporations and reits and we’ll all live in slums. We won’t have a choice.
The MLS is largely operated by NAR and its members who subscribe to a code of ethics. NAR authored a national code of ethics in the 1940’s and uses the MLS largely to enforce it.
Guess who doesn’t have an MLS - NYC. Guess who owns most of the real estate there? Corporations, REITs, and foreign investors who drive the prices up. Guess who lives in slums? A lot of New Yorkers.
The lawyers will be the only winners. I guarantee those “class-action” letters will offer participants $25 and a “free identity protection subscription.”
Lol, ie NOTHING.
If take the settlement amount and give 40-% to Michael catch mark the attorney he’ll make hundreds of millions. Then you divide the rest the number of people who bought and sold homes in Missouri those years. It’s about $100.00 per closing. Divide the remainder by the number of people who will join the class action suit and the individual rewards will be pennies.
So can we finally get rid of PACs?????
Good. Hopefully, car dealership control over new car sales is next.
lets here it for the Civil Courts ! There is this case. there are the devastating judgments against folks like Alex jones, Trump, The NRA, etc. I donate money to the groups who sue on behalf of righteousness. eg, the Southern poverty law Center. Planned parenthood, etc.
Unfortunately, this time REALTORS are mostly individuals who don’t have college degrees, who make an average of $45k/year and who are women and or minorities. So this attack, by an attorney who can afford to work on contingency and will make hundreds of millions of dollars, is on people who you would route for. NAR publishes an annual report disclosing who their members are and how much money they make. They also lobby politically for the protection of home ownership for individuals. Not entirely for industry professionals.
I’m with you otherwise. Every time I eat at chic-filet I make a donation to planned parenthood in the same amount as my meal. I wish I could make a zap to do it for me.
I'm not sure prices will go down. Less commission is probably going to lead to higher house pricing to get there commission. There should be a limit on how much corporations (remodel industry) can buy in any one location.
I wish they were good journalists and interviewed at least one voice or argument from the other side. It's all very one note. Simplistic. They make it out like it's unequivocally good news.
There MAY will be some benefits to consumers and some drawbacks. But that is not at all guaranteed. Just the smallest amount of research could have shown these cub reporters that some analysts actually believe this will result in higher real estate prices.
One red flag is how quickly NAR agreed to the settlement. My spidey-sense says this is NOT of benefit to the people.
We will have to wait and see. But from this one sided lazy reporting I feel like I’ve only gotten one side of the story.
Badly done NYT.
Agreed. Most one sided episode is the daily ever. It’s just a list of headlines. No facts. No POV from the other side. Slow day at the news desk I guess.
What terrible reporting. Sounds like a PR piece. Journalism should educate and analyze from all angles. Not just celebrate and spin. I really expected better from the NYT.
Okay, fine: I’ll do the reporters job for her:
Here are just a few ways this could be BAD NEWS for consumers and result in higher housing prices and higher commissions:
-create the perception in the public mind that there’s a “fire sale” and drive interest in a housing market that has been stagnant for months, thus driving up prices.
-There is nothing in the settlement that says that commissions will go down. There are a number of industry analysts who say this may case commissions to go up.
Note: Commission percentages were always negotiable. This lawsuit changes nothing about that.
“Commission” will likely just be turned to “contingency fee” which is what lawyers charge. Means when the case result comes they get their fee which is usually a percentage of the judgement.
Deborah chants there was/ is a "6% rule" enforced by NAR. I've never been shown that rule in writing or otherwise. Commissions have always been negotiable and always will be.
Yup. The purchase price is determined by the market. Probably more so in residential real estate than any other.
Going forward that purchase price will still include compensation for the listing agent but nothing for buyer representation. The buyer financing the purchase of the home either goes without or pays more. How does that help? It doesn't.
Exactly! This honestly will produce a larger gap between the haves and the have nots. What about VA, FHA, USDA home purchasers who put very little to nothing down? And sellers? When you bought your house that you are selling, did you pay your realtor? No. Because the buyers agent, while representing the interest of the buyer, still works to make the seller a profit. And seller’s commission? Always negotiable! No one is forcing anyone to pay 6%. Because some stupid Realtor said it was customary, doesn’t mean your listing agreement said it was customary. I know the one’s i’ve sign in two different states all said it was negotiable. No one forced those seller’s to pay 6%.
This is going to make rich people richer and keep poor people out of the housing market.
Reporting with zero investigation of the truth. Not speaking to anyone in Fair Housing or an actual Realtor, just deplorable.
Agreed with all! I’m shocked there was no mention that NAR requires its members to abide by a code of ethics that it published in the 1940’s whereas real estate agents do not subscribe to a nationally established code of ethics or any ethics at all.
They also did not report that the political lobbying is for the rights of home owners and promotion of homeownership for all especially underserved population. That’s in the best interest of REALTORS. If the general public cannot achieve home ownership then who needs any agent or attorney to transact the ownership of real property from one individual to another.
I can never make it through more than ten minutes of these before Michael’s constant “umhums” send me into a spiral. I gotta ask my therapist why I keep coming back.
lol. This is a hilarious comment. Most people missed it. I see what you did there. 😂
He and the guest clearly hate real estate agents. Maybe because they’re New Yorkers, a population that can no longer afford to individually own real estate. They largely live in slums because corporations and REITS own and control then housing market. Donald Trump for example.
The sounds you’re hearing in this episodes are laughs and gaffs at the misfortune of an unpopular group of individuals. NAR publishes an annual kewpies where you can learn that REALTORS make an average of $45k/year, many are part time and gig workers because they don’t have college degrees, most are women and or minorities.
Although Michael and the Guest claim to be home owners and use themselves as examples of individuals who can take part in this lawsuit, the more people who do who were not actually wronged, means anyone who actually was wronged will make proportionately less in their reparations. The one attorney they mention is a villain and will make 40% of the settlement on contingency regardless. He’ll make 100’s of millions of dollars. The heirs of his estate will have generational wealth until the ocean swallows all the real estate in the world.
Additionally NAR doesn’t have a presence in NYC which also doesn’t have a MLS that creates a market so no matter where in or around NYC Michael and his guest bought, yes they are probably disgruntled.
This is such great news. It still burns me that my recently widowed mother hired a Realtor referred to her by a relative to sell her Chico Ca home. Very shortly after my Mom was approached by a friend who wanted to buy her house and introduced him to the Realtor. When it came time to sign closing documents we discovered that the Realtors fee had doubled.The reason given was that the realtor was also representing the buyer and charged my Mom for that. The sale of this home could not have been simpler, yet the realtor thought she deserved $15,000. more dollars. I discussed this with the realtor and she gave me a bunch of excuses.. This was back in the early 2000’s and my mother has since passed, so no recourse for her..
sorry to hear that. You should ask a lawyer if you can recover that.
Or… just READ your contracts before you sign them.
@@tedtalksrock We did. My Mom didn’t want the hassles she just went along.
Sounds like the person who referred you to a crappy realtor should be in trouble. Do your own research. Don’t use friends or relatives.
I pretty sure the English language rules deem that word as having three syllables. Real (two syllables) + tor (one) = Ree-al-tor (three). Just my math. haha
I always felt agents got way too much money! Never will I pay 6%. Never. I do most of the work!
Words this busy listener dreads: (After our little intro) "Ok, we have to slow this down. Tell us the history of the subject. How did we get here?". Please, don't. Or at least give us the timestamp for the contemporary discussion. We just need the contemporary situation, not the history. This is a problem with many, many docs, on TH-cam and other places.
They never go into the history.
NAR is 100 years old because real estate agents are self regulated. Without NAR there is no regulation of this profession except state and federal law.
If your real estate agent didn’t perform their job ethically outside of NAR you would be left to call the police.
I complained to the state about a real estate agent twice and the FBI is the regulatory body that responds on their behalf. They were pulled off of real important work to deal with real estate agents who didn’t list their broker first on a sign or use a font size bigger than the one they used for their own names. Yes it is the actual law that real estate agents can’t be listed on their for sale signs more prominently than their brokerage. But don’t worry. Once they don’t get paid to do their job anymore, the consumer can deal with that.
Another time was because COMPASS was advertising that they sold listings that were in fact sold by other brokerages because COMPASS is new to the game they actually have less experience than any older brokerage. The FBI did not deal with this one but NAR’s local subsidiary GPAR did. GREATER PHILADELPHIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, because misrepresentation of an agent’s experience is not a law its business ethics.
Buyer agents that are paid by the seller, work for the seller. As a buyer, i would be happy to pay a buyer agent to lower the sales price. Maybe I could pay them a percentage of the difference between the higher list price and the lowered sale price.
The buyer finances a home purchase. Until now purchase price includes the selling agents commission and the buyers representative. With this ruling the purchase price still includes the sellers representatives compensation but not the buyers. Is that better or worse?
@@MegaTornado79 - there probably won't be a commission at all. No agents should get paid a % of the total price. Realtors can sell their time by the hour and buyers can talk to their agent for a 2 hour meeting and pay for 2 hours of time. Then they can walk down the street and talk to another realtor and pay for 2 hours of time.
And buyers can drive themselves around. They can talk to a million horrible lenders who can charge whatever junk fees they want. They can talk to a million title companies that can charge whatever junk fees they want. Or just skip title if they want because they don’t know what it is. They can hire a budget home inspector who can kill the deal as many times as he wants so he can get multiple inspections out of them. They can pay for extra appraisals. They can pay for insurance companies to inspect their homes. They can buy multiple home warranties that don’t cover anything. They can take the house as is because the seller says it’s great. They can pay their deposits into unprotected accounts. Whose accounts? Who knows. Maybe the sellers. Maybe the seller can choose to just not sell to the buyer and keep the money. Maybe the buyer can just walk away and never put a deposit down and get sued. It’ll be nice for the agents to not have to buy insurance to be covered for these kinds of problems even though they’re not at fault. You know what. Buyers and sellers can just work with each other, lie to each other, have no ethics or regulations for free.
Wait a minute. That’s already a thing. Never mind.
I keep thinking back to why the real estate broker profession came to be in the first place. The naïveté of people thinking it's just filling out forms and opening doors.
Sadly there are going to be some hard lessons for buyers that decide to go alone or think that just using an attorney will cover everything.
Misinformation. Flag this
i now a guy who sold his houses "by owner"
The landlord class will organize to curb consumer / renter friendly legizlation and they will not stop bribing BOTH parties ! - But with how often people sell homes in the U.S. 6 % of one of the larges purchases a family will ever make - it will add up. Let's say a family bought and sold ! three homes over the course of 15 years (whenever they sold one they needed another one, so essentially they sold home 1 and 2 and now live in home 3, which is not _that_ unrealistic). In total 2 million USD of volume (for 3 houses but 5 transactions, each transaction 400k on average).
Of course if new houses are sold directly by the company that built them they will be comission free (I assume).
And they paid 3 % on that (they split commission with the respective seller or buyer, so each one pays the 3 % per transaction). So that is USD 60,000 USD in commission for people that live in their third home. And in other countries it would be half or a bit more than half. Where I live 3 % are common and the seller has to cover it (for rentals I think they split it between landlord and renter). It depends - less if it is a big home, higher percentage resp. the full 3 % if the sales price is lower.
Oh my gosh, this is WILD!!! Thanks for covering this important topic :)
This was fascinating! One of my top stories of the year so far from the daily.
Long overdue. Finally!
Finally. These guys are like the mafia. My realtor for the house I bought last summer did almost nothing and she made almost $20k. I had already picked out the house to buy. It’s infuriating. And she had the nerve to give me a ‘gift’ basket of crap worth about $50 for the closing. I despise her.
Sue her.
Let me guess. She was a friend of the family? Or your aunt?
Oh it wasn't the government that brought down one of the biggest superpacs? Who would have guessed it 😮
Are you saying that creating and ensuring policies like law and order, rights to sue and all that, protected by the governing bodies, had no effect here?
Don't fool yourself into simple thinking. This is not some idiotic us against them nonsense, we have to work together, we have to give leaders power to lead in their space, and we have to become leaders to lead in our own space. Life is complicated, stay in the grey and use your head.
Government of the people, by the people, for the people.
@@wi2rd
You edited that word salad, maybe you should have done better. I know how to read but this is a mess.
@@therealunicornselene great tactic to counter with personal attacks. A valuable addition to any debate.
@@wi2rd wasn't attacking you personally just literally didn't understand the point you were making, if you had one.
There was literally a quote in the episode that said the government wasn't the one that brought them down. Obviously the justice system is part of the government, but after a century of fixing, lobbying, and redistricting it does feel a little late to give any of them credit when it took a class action lawsuit to get it done. Not sure if that was relevant to your point or not because, like I said, I couldn't tell if you had one. Maybe go back and read what you wrote from my perspective and try to see where I'm coming from? There's no way I could tell what it is you are meaning. Yes, we need to work together. I'm sure they were! I bet they donated across the board to Republicans and Democrats - I would, and there's no way they'd done what they did without it. Anyway wasn't meaning an attack just asking for some clarity after the unrequested essay you'd submitted.
@@therealunicornselene thank you for explaining your intent.
The point I was trying to make is that government was absolutely involved.
Often to get things done we need many actors to take lead in their roles.
We all have our part to play.
I can complain about my boss at work all day long, or I can take action myself and work with my boss, understand and respect their limits and time, learn from it, and try to fill in the gaps to achieve better results, together.
To focus on making things better, not on blame.
house Prices are not going to drop because of this. The realtors will figure out how to make up the difference
Very interesting. I'll use SALE BY OWNER, like they do in the Wild, wild, west. Or use Zillow. Or just plant a sign in front. Watch them come flooding...and I'm not swayed by "cash offers." I dictate the terms, not the buyer. If you want what I have, you conform to my rules.
You've always had that option.
I got the chills! Had to listen to it twice to make sure this is real lol
But... the buyers paid the commission.
Don't get me wrong dismantling the lobbying arm and freeing up competition is GREAT. But if the seller passed on the 6%... and can now recoup it... the seller is up 6%, the buyer who actually PAID it and is still paying interest on it and living in the home is out that 6% and cannot pass it on when selling because of the new rules. 🤔
We don’t yet know what the remedy will be. I’m sure the attorneys can figure that out.
Yup.
But that's a pretty good summation of where we are now
This is just about commission money for agents. What are they worth? They absolutely are not worth 6% of a 400k transaction. What is a realtor worth per hour? 30-60 bucks an hour??? Probably 1500-3000 per transaction is all they are actually worth. I hope the market gets absolutely thrashed. Think about this, if I sell my house for 400k, and I have 60k equity. And then these leaches want 24,000, my actual take is only 36,000. Absolutely BS. If anything actually comes out of this,I hope the massive conflict of interest where the buyers agent getting paid by the sellers agent ends. There needs to be a 100% decoupling of the buyers and sellers agents and it should never ever be a commission on the price of the house.
Thank you for being so off the mark. It's clear neither of you did any real research before blathering with each on this useless podcast.
You guys sound very ignorant with everything you’re saying. Why don’t you guys get an experienced real estate broker in this conversation to shed some light on all of this because neither one of you understand anything about this lawsuit. I’m not trying to hateful, but this really is uneducated reporting.
-I myself never had a standard 6% rate.
-This lawsuit means that now buyers and sellers will each negotiate their own commission and individually pay that commission to their agent instead of the seller paying it out of the seller proceeds at closing.
-This won’t make it easier for buys in any way. In fact it will make it much harder for buyers to pay for representation when buying a home because the buyers have to pay more closing cost than sellers do.
-I understand the lawsuit and how the seller is paying a buyers agent to negotiate against them, but the commissions have basically been paid forward by the sellers. So let’s say you sell a home and buy another home. The seller of the home you are buying has offered compensation to your agent (just like you did when selling your home) so the only cost you incurred in commission was when you sold your home. Trying to dump it down a little bit. so I hope that makes sense.
-I keep hearing that commissions are going down and that’s not at all the case. . Is inflation going down? lol What is changing is how agents get paid. I welcome change, but I do not think this is good for Buyers that already incur higher closing cost.
That’s my rant.🤪