Little late to this discussion. I was a Realtor until about a year ago in PA. I was primarily a buyer agent. I usually worked with working folks, 90k to 250k range. When the interest rates started increasing, my clients all pretty much stopped looking. Now, this is a double whammy asking these buyers, who mostly struggled to come up with down payments, etc who often needed seller assist, to also pay the buyer agent. I always used a buyers agreement, but it was more or less a formality as the seller paid the commission. I actually had to walk away from clients as they didn't see any value in my services and would just contact the list agent. I also had shifty list agents who who kept 3.5% out of 6% instead of an even split. So glad I got out when I did, this is going to be chaos.
@@zz5guy the agent on either side of the sale doesn't get the full commission. Depending on the split, the broker takes anywhere from 50% to 20%. Also, the broker takes a flat fee per transaction for marketing, MLS and "processing". Also, many times there is a referral fee, anywhere from 25% to 35%. As a matter of fact, buyers/sellers BY LAW cannot directly pay the agents. The money is paid to the broker, then distributed. At my last broker, $1000, even without a referral, I would have ended up with probably around $350 to $400. Also, there is gas money to take into account, which can add up quickly.
This reply is for the guy that says $1000 is enough… Are you serious? What about retirement savings and all the other expenses associated with not having a salary and being present in financially responsible for your family. In the old way of 6%, 90% of agents were still failing. This will only favor Wall Street firms who will offer no hassle deals online through platforms. I am starting to believe that baby boomers are the worst generation ever. They left the country worse than they received it. This is very sad
When I moved from Tucson to Oregon, I pretty much had to use a buyer's agent because houses were flying off the market. We also had a very limited time to look at houses when we came up here specifically for that, so having a buyer's agent organize our visit so we could see as many houses as possible. It was still rough. We must have looked at a couple of dozen houses, several of which sold before we even had a chance to put an offer in. I'm not crazy about the house we ended up with, but it was the best one for what we could afford at the time. I believe that having a buyer's agent for this experience was absolutely mandatory.
Well pretty soon you will be organizing it yourself, with a listing agent, and if you want to buy it, you will have to agree to Intermediary relationship, of which the Realtor will be a party to 10 other law suits because the seller had an advantage by establishing a relationship first with their neighbor, friends, family, referral etc. and the buyer was completely neutral and taken advantage of. Fiduciary duty must become a thing of the past, and the code of ethics has to shrink to one page, called "Canons Code to not getting sued." I expect hundres of thousands of Realtors will change careers by choice or force, and NAR will open the MLS up to the public and charge them to look and charge them to post their own homes. This road only goes slowly down hill for the consumer, and Realtors. Its FSBO or intermediary going forward, and homes will sell so fast with a coming soon sign, you will wonder why you pay HAR $1,200 a year for.
One thing no one has talked about is the listing agent now has to do all the showings..write up offers from buyers they don’t represent, and work directly with their lenders to make sure everything is on track…and they want us to work for the same or lower commission? 😳
This is what I've been saying. How many buyers won't even be qualified yet want to get a tour. The buyers are going to flood seller agents with questions. They are going to have to come up with a way that the buyer can tour the house on their own or have some paid to open the door.
@@chrisz7083yep! Forgot about the buyers not even being qualified or knowing what it means to be qualified..we expect these people to represent themselves? yea it’s gonna be a cluster. Then 10 years from now we will have a lawsuit that buyers need representation.
@RealEstateCoach Problem I see is that the buyers agent will need to get an agreement prior to even showing a place. They wont know if the sellers agents were able to negotiate that prior to looking at homes. The buyer could always say, "Look, the only homes we can buy are the ones where the seller pays both agents." Many buyers , even if they want to pay the buyers agent, really can't because of all the other costs.
@@RealEstateCoach I agree…but the first year is going to be a race to the bottom. Then things will sort themselves out and commissions will come back up.
Since the announcement was made I’ve watched dozens of commentary and I have to say your video has been the most objective and informative. Thanks so much for this!
Great Job! Listing agents have long negotiated the commission upfront. That is about to change. Buyers agent commission will most likely be another negotiation in the contract and the buyers agent will have little leverage. How often has your commission been paid by the buyer?
You are the rare bird. In my area, BA jump in the car with people with no buyer agreement, no pre-approval, and frequently can’t even tell me what their buyer is looking for. It’s very frustrating because they want to waste my time as well. I sell new construction and we attend all of our showings to demonstrate our homes. I hope there are significant changes.
On my last deal, I added an addendum to the Buyer-broker agreement stating my 3% commission could be lowered to 2% if the Seller was unwilling or unable to pay the commission. Everything below 2% would be the buyer's responsibility.
Didn't NAR state a few months ago that they wouldn't settle and would continue to fight? Is it just me or does anyone else feel betrayed? Did anyone else watch the trial? Specifically when they were cross examining the plantiff? Didn't anyone else see how much they held back? This is ridiculous and will certainly negatively impact buyers in the long run...waiting for the next lawsuit.
So many other countries charge 6%. Portugal is a European country that charges 6% Brazil is a South American country that charges 6%. The US is the North American country that used to charge 6%. The reason for this lawsuit is Wall Street.
@@sportsman4545 no it's not. the seller can't even pay 2 comissions. it's always one. to the sellers agent. it's up for the seller agent to decide if it splits and how to split. no buyers ever pay anything to the buyer agents. neither buyer agents ever receive anything from the sellers. this NAR settlement is completely different. doesn't work the same way
@@sportsman4545 it was always negotiable here. and it was always illegal to receive comissions from both sides of the deal. you could in theory make the buyer pay the full comission but it never happens. there's no such thing as a buyer agreement contract. there's no NAR equivalent and there's no MLS and some agents and brands don't split the deal with other agents which harms everyone. so, very different world. you also don't need a license. kinda crazy. why buyer and seller fees weren't negotiable? kinda confusing to me
Hey Jackie, One thing I was thinking that could happen, if sellers feel they do not have to pay a buyer agent commission, we could see more homeowners come on the market causing a glut of homes that sit and expire causing home prices to eventually fall as it becomes a buyers market. It will be interesting to see how things evolve in the coming months!
The only one benefitting from this settlement is the law firm that is collecting 30% to 40% commission. It’s not going to benefit buyers or sellers. Not disclosing buyers agent commission in the MLS doesn’t serve any useful purpose but it’s going to result in a lot more phone calls to listing agents regarding buyers agents compensation. If the buyer has to pay his agent a fee it can’t be rolled into his loan as is presently done. How does this benefit the buyer? It doesn’t. Look for a lot more dual agent lawsuits.
There is a lot of work that goes into being a real estate agent. Your comments reflects your lack of understanding and hardships every real estate agent faces.
@@fordilacWhere do you draw the line? Do you think there is the same amount of work and expertise to sell a million dollar home as there is to selling a $50,000? Where’s your line? And if you are drawing a line, how are you justifying price fixing? Do all attorneys charge the same? Do all plumbers charge the same? Do all cars cost the same? Commissions are negotiable. Always have been. If the agent charges more than the customer is willing to pay, then the customer can choose another agent in their price range. Just like you can choose another attorney, hair stylist, plumber or car.
With your logic, all car salespersons, or any salesperson for that matter, should make the exact same, no matter the vehicle or other items. What about stockbrokers? Do you tip 50% at a cheap diner where you’re receiving the exact same service at a nicer restaurant?
My thoughts about the NAR lawsuit and upcoming changes in our industry, and how things should be moving forward: First, I think that all representation deserves compensation. Buyers should think about saving money to afford themselves representation, and if they find a property where the commission would be covered they can use their funds otherwise. This would make for stronger Buyers and would set boundaries between both parties. Just my two cents.
The whole lawsuit was garbage, except if there was no disclosure in the listing contract. Commission has always been negotiable and here in in California, the seller is made aware that the listing broker intends to share the commission with the buyer’s agent. As long as the seller signs that agreement, there’s no reason to complain about how the listing broker disburses the commission. Not displaying it in the MLS is shady, if the seller wants to sell, pay for the service of the buyer’s agent, who actually has the responsibility of ensuring the deal closes. Maybe owners should just advertise their homes first sale and buyers can contact them directly, that way they wouldn’t have to pay commission. An agent who has a buyer can approach the seller and do a ‘one party’ show and sign a contract with seller allowing agent to show the property for a negotiated fee, either a flat fee or a percentage between 2-3 percent. It’s not complicated.
Everyone knows a FSBO is looking to save the commission and a FSBO buyer is looking for a deal Always leaves money on the table even if they brag they sold it themselves. Limited exposure to cheap buyers.
if you get a shitty agent that agrees with less than 6% you are sure to lose more than 6%. a good agent will defend your best interests and will get more money in your pocket even after you paying the 6%.
I'm looking at buying a $1M+ home. I will NOT pay an agent 30K to walk me into a house (that I found on Zillow) and to send me some docu-signs in an e-mail. NO WAY.
Astute Listing agents will thrive regardless as complexity premium just makes it more of a proverbial shark tank to sub 115 IQ buyers and 'lion seal' agents)
I believe that when buyer asks seller - through purchase offer - to pay (as in your example) 2.5% and the seller comes back and say "no, but will pay 1.5%) - at this point I do not see buyer on the hook as they just received a counter offer which they do not need to accept. They can now negotiate with their agent or they can counter the seller's counter. Here could be the rub - in that scenario the buyer now knows how much the seller is willing to pay of the buyer's commission. If the buyer's agent will not renegotiate with their buying client, you may see buyers trying to end their representation and getting themselves a new agent. Currently, most agents working will a BBA will let their buyer's out if their buyer states they don't have rapport or trust in the agent.
There is alot of difference in this market due to internet. I think that is huge and the industry need to recognize this. The internet has made home shopping easier and eliminates alot of leg work for the agent.
Thanks Jackie! So I had a thought...if a buyer gies directly to the listing agent, and the NAR agreement says a buyer has to sign a buyer's agreement, would they have to sign one with the listing agent? How might that work??
My experience is a seller is eager to pay buyers commission in order to attract agents to the home. If commission is 0, it becones a negative. Now, buyers agents have to say I'm worth it. If you want the home, there you go.
I realize that it was a misstatement when you said the NAR settlement was 4.18 million instead of 418 million dollars. If a buyer calls the listing agent directly, it sets up a duel agency situation. If the seller is only paying the listing agent commission, and a buyer goes to the listing agent, will they need to have the buyer sign a buyers agreement as well? If that is the case it will make the duel agency a real problem.
@@LauraStoddardTNThat will create a bigger problem than what the lawsuit was intended to solve. For sale by owner may not be as difficult as a buyer without an agent. Who writes the offer? Does an uninformed buyer know to set up time for home inspections? When do you need a radon inspection? Who sets up the appraisal? Do you go with a basic or extended title insurance? Who sets up the closing? When does the buyer receive an estimate of closing? How do you as an unrepresented buyer visit properties?
Agreed!!! On point. Well covered....delivered by one of our industries BEST!! There is one thing though Jackie. I think the market potentially COILD be impacted negatively in regards to prices slowing or even dropping in some markets because of this impact. The reasoning being leading up to July and in the subsequent 6-12 month...I believe...there will be confusion, settling and discovery on all sides, Buyers/Sellers, Buyers Agenrs/Listing Agents on how to deal with the multitude of variables that could play out on who pays what, why and how. Limited mindsets, scarcity, lack of skills all I see playing a part in the mess that I see playing out whoch then leads to slower decision making and less transactions through this awkward period...causing prices to fall as homes take even longer to sell because of less prepare and less willing Buyers. I don't see it being catastrophic...but I could see a slowing and negative impact at least moderately in values especially in areas like Austin TX where I am, where the market is still struggling! You're the Best Jackie!! Keep up the great work!!
Hey Paul, I agree that there will be confusion and it could temporary slow things down. Being the master that you are, I'm sure you'd agree that knowledgeable, professional and skilled listing agents will shine regardless of what direction this all takes.
The best explanation and assessment Jackie: I sent the link to many folks interested in this with several luxury properties will be on the block for family trust. SUBSCRIBED. Thank you. Matcha served as appreciation. 🍵🎏
This change is just so stupid. So basically they say do what you used to do just don't put it on the damn MLS. Put the commission on social media, website, via phone call, email, message, seller agreement form except MLS!!! That doesn't make any sense. What kind of stupid court judges and law makers we have in the US?
Nice recap with more realistic seller and buyer insights. Most sellers will not agree to pay buyers agent who is primarily working for the Buyer. Many buyers will not use an agent and deal directly with listing agent when they find out previously free services are now potentially tens of thousands of dollars.
Buyers have already been paying the commissions when they pay the price of the home. Buyers gives sellers the money/price which closing costs come out of. Sold comps have buyers commissions figured in.
My buyers haven’t. Actually, what I’m saying is the price of the homes, up to this point, have already factored in all the commissions including buyer’s commissions, which is part of the seller’s closing costs. Buyers are paying those prices. Values are based on sold comps which have included all commissions in Seller’s closing costs. I think this may encourage unrepresented buyers or dual agency, which isn’t good in my opinion, and may soften buyer demand. It’s a life event market right now, a lot of first time home buyers. Now this ruling could make even more expensive for buyers. Something we’ll have to figure out in the coming months.
True. But this brings up a separate issue that the prices of MLS listed properties will be somewhat higher than FSBO sales of comparable properties. This is a market distortion that artificially inflates prices. So separating the buyer's agent commission from the sale price creates a more efficient and accurate market for appraisers.
@@tylerjohnson415 my point exactly 👍🏾 👍🏾. It is the buyer that determines the value at the end of the day. I spoke real estate for years and even I figured that out within my first year selling real estate.
It's a nice video - thanks. I can imagine a scenario where life gets harder for listing agents also. Two offers come in. The offer represented by an agent is lower. So, the seller accepts the high offer that is not represented by an agent. The buyers representing themselves can't get the loan, the inspections, understand title reports, etc., in time to release contingencies. Sellers have to cancel and go back to a softening market, after two weeks off.
I sell new construction only and in the interest of getting the job done, we deal directly with our buyers, their lender, their title company, and we show and demonstrate all our homes features. I have always found the BA does very little and we close many homes without hiccups with no BA. The vast majority of BA show up for the contract, and disappear until closing, which is 9 months in between and many on site meetings with the buyers. We invite them to all meetings, by and large they are MIA until settlement and commission check. If buyers have to pay for that out of their own pocket it will be quite comical to see the pushback. Right now buyers don’t care much because they have been trained by the real estate industry that the buyers agent is free, wait until they realize it never was. 😂😂
This is so interesting that we are hearing several real estate coaches talk buyer engagement contract. We have had them in Georgia for a long time and they have always included the compensation. This is nothing new here, and will be mostly business as usual, with the exception of the advertising of the buy commission on MLS.
Great Job! Listing agents have long negotiated the commission upfront. That is about to change. Buyers agent commission will most likely be another negotiation in the contract and the buyers agent will have little leverage. How often has your commission been paid by the buyer?
The buyer agreement agreement is nothing new but buyer’s paying their own commission is. There was very little financial risk for a buyer signing these since their commission was covered by the listing agent 99.9% to the time.
@@kristensimpsonrealtor I think it’s going to have more effect on the rest of the country that it is on the state of Georgia. Our MLS systems are not affiliated with national Association of realtors, and therefore are not held under the settlement agreement that is being negotiated by. NAR. In addition, it has never been a requirement to add any sort of compensation onto the MLS system. When properties were flying off of the market in 2021 and 2022 there were multiple selling agents that put 0% or just did not add it into the MLS. I believe the solutions are actually a little bit simpler, and we are making more out of this than is necessary. there are other ways listing agents can advertise a buyers agent commission. It is up to us as real estate professionals to educate our clients as that is what is best in terms of getting their house sold for the highest price possible. The point I’m making is we have already been doing some of these things in the state of Georgia and I may be wrong about this, so please do your own due diligence, but I know the state of Washington has not been allowed to put commissions onto their MLS, and from what I understand they are doing just fine up there.
Nothing to worry about. The industry will adjust like it always has done before. As an agent, you need to always communicate your value proposition to your clients.
Nothing to worry about just 50% of realtors getting out of the business and everyone having their income reduced dramatically get your head out of the sand
That is a correct statement, buyers or listing agents don't do much of anything to earn the commission. In fact agents know very little about real estate. Licensing class teaches you rules and regs and paperwork, nothing about real estate.
I'm predominately a Listing Agent (LA) and in the State of FL I work as a Single Agency Broker. I always tell the Seller that the real estate commissions are negotiable. As a LA what would you say to the unrepresented Buyer who bypasses a Buyer Agent and wants to write their offer through me the LA? Obviously the Buyer doesn't want to pay a commission. Would you suggest as the LA we negotiate the commission directly with the Buyer? Could I ask them to compensate me with a flat fee of $$$$$ or pay me a % of the purchase price to write the offer? As a single agency agent in FL, I must ask the Seller and have both parties sign the Consent to Transition into a Transaction Broker in order to represent both parties. In my opinion, being a strong negotiator to negotiate commission fees will weed out the premier agents from the agents who will ultimately exit this industry.
Absolutely!!! Listing agents should set the right expectations at the listing presentation and possibly negotiate a higher commission for handling both sides of the transaction.
With the new commission rule in place in July, can a Listing Broker compensate the Buyer's Broker directly with the Seller's approval? If I can negotiate a 5% Listing Broker fee with the Seller can I split my commission with the Buyer's Broker, can pay the Buyer's Broker 2.5% commission out of my Listing Broker's fee? Will that be allowed with the new rules? @@RealEstateCoach
Jackie luv your input so would an option for buyers agent be that if a buyer does not have enough to pay the commission can that be raised from the price of the property to where it off sets the commission and it’s financed and added to their mortgage so the agent gets paid at closing. I hope I explained it correctly.
The buyer must agree to agent commission upfront. It then becomes the agents responsibility to negotiate the commission from the seller. If the seller doesn’t agree the buyer is then expected to pay. If the appraisal is more than the purchase price it would be an option to increase the purchase price and finance the commission. This creates other challenges for the buyer.
I see listing agent fees going up a bit over time, and over 50% of buyer agent business going away after agents get through all the stages of grief (agents are currently in the initial Denial phase; can hear it in their arguments). Once agents get to the Anger phase, they’ll take it out on everyone. Acceptance will result in a mass exodus. Listing agents will win.
Great info. Spot on. The agents who have the skill set will make more money and the agents who don’t will lose money or quit the business. My only question is what happens when you have a listing agreement signed before July at 6% and the seller agrees to pay a buyer agent 3%. Will those be grandfathered in or will you have to renegotiate the full commission once July hits?
I think if the Buyer wants to make sure they have representation then this will go over fine. It's those that think they need no representation and fell the Seller Agent will take care of the Buyer, and that's not the case. Seller agent is for the seller not buyer, with this rule or not that remans the same. Once buyers start getting screwed over by the Seller agents we will have lawsuits once again for no representation when the buyer wouldn't work with someone to represent them and make sure everything was done accordingly and no problems with anything. Seller agents have their place, buyer agents have their place for those that know and understand what a buyer agent does... It will just take time to work itself out.
It’s really simple. The Buyer hires their own Realtor or Advisor or Attorney, and they pay that person. The glitch is it is going to hurt first time Buyers who don’t have much money. If you’re selling a 900 thousand dollar house, whoever is buying a house at that price can afford to pay for their own Broker.
Ultimately, all Broker commissions come out of the same pool of money it doesn't matter if the check is issued by the seller's side or the buyers side. If there is a buyer's agent that amount is going to end up getting worked into the purchase price being offered. You will have a gross purchase price and a net purchase price after the buyer agent commission is deducted. All this is going to do is create new forms that need to be filled out, an exclusivity in buyer representation, and a re-working in how purchase offers are worded. It's going to create different options for buyer agent payouts.
Imagine the lawsuits that are about to happen! My guess is 60% of the lawsuits will be from buyers who feel the seller accepted a lower offer than theirs. Also a huge portion of lawsuits will be from sellers that find out the listing agent withheld a better offer because the better offer requested less commission.
Sellers do not have to accept the highest offer. This happened to me several times as a buyer agent. For example, if the lower offer was cash. Sometimes it was the type of loan the buyer had. Sometimes the seller was nervous about an appraisal that may not come thru. Sometimes other buyers may be willing to skip inspection and repairs. It really is a case by case situation.
In advance of any showings how can I determine how much work and hours I will put in for a buyer? 1 house or 36 homes? Title issues, financial issues, inspection issues. This is a hot mess.
The root of the problem is that real estate agents are independent contractors, and not employees. As an IC, each agent is responsible for ALL aspects of their business - everybody is good at something, but very few people are competent enough at the wide array of skills required to succeed in real estate, and that's why 80% of agents only survive 2 years in the business. Having each agent do everything is like replacing the assembly line at General Motors, and having each person follow the frame down the assembly line, 1st putting the wheels on, then attaching the engine, then the seats, and then the body and windows... HUGELY inefficient! The real estate industry is decades (or centuries) behind the rest of the economy! Changing to an employee-based structure can dramatically improve efficiency, and reduce the cost of marketing and closing real estate by 50-90%! The National Assoc. of REALTORS has no incentive to improve efficiency, because they collect more dues based on their membership numbers, and if their membership drops 90% they'll be hurting big-time!
Completely disagree. The listing agents are going to educate the seller the value of offering a commission to the buying agent. By offering no commission to remove a large amount of your buyers pool. They will factor in the price into the sale price before they list.
Listing agents not negotiating a commission for a buyer’s agent upfront does not mean a seller is opposed to paying a commission. Sellers will ultimately choose the best offer that nets them the most amount of money. A Buyer’s agent is able to justify ANY commission so long as it’s the best offer from what the seller has to choose from.
Washington state just rolled out a new buyer agency agreement January1st in anticipation of this settlement- however if the SOC is more than agreed there are options that I guess will no longer be … Seller's Offer is greater than the Compensation, ✅Buyer shall 4 accept Seller's Offer and Buyer shall not be obligated ot separately pay Firm. ✅The amount of Seller's Ofer that is greater than the Compensation shall be: ▫️Paid to Firm; ▫️Credited to Buyer (to the extent allowed by Buyer's lender) and any non-allowed amount paid to Firm; ▫️Credited to the seller; or ▫️Other:
I see lots of realtors dropping their licenses in the very near future. No one is going to work for free. Agents who don’t provide value except for opening the Supra’s won’t be able to compete with real professionals. I always signed buyers rep agreement AND had them pre-approved prior to showings.
The changes resulting from this lawsuit are significantly disadvantageous, exemplifying another instance where decisions have primarily favored the interests of the baby boomer generation, often at the expense of others. Agents play a crucial role, effectively representing the needs and interests of both buyers and sellers, highlighting their importance in every aspect of the transaction.
Mr Seller -- you're paying me X% for my listing service. I'm going to give X% of my commission you are paying me to any other agent appropriately licensed whatever percentage I'd like from the % you give ME for my service. Nothing has changed except Media gone wild. What else is new. Buyer agents will call me before showing and ask if we are offering commission. I'll let them know how much of my commission I'm willing to share with them to bring their buyer. The only thing that has changed is I'm not putting that on the MLS and I'm having buyer's sign agency agreements.
😂😂😂Nope, the whole thing decouples the commission split. It’s not up to you to determine how much of your brokerage commission goes to the BA. Some folks never learn. 🤦♀️
If a buyer calls a lawyer for the lawyer to draft the contract and the lawyer charges let’s say $1,000. If the buyer sends the offer and for some reason don’t get the house they will be down $1,000 and still no house. Also who’s going to show the homes? If the buyers don’t want to sign the agreement because they don’t want to pay the BA who will show them the homes? Will listing agents have to became transaction brokers more often? Will the listing agent have to negóciate a comisión as a single agent and in the event he has to become a transaction broker a higher commission will have to be negotiated? So many questions 😂 time will tell
I think these are what's going to happen: 1. House price going to go down a bit for a short time because the seller do not have to pay for buyer agent. 2. For those states that allow dual agency, the listing agent will ended up representing both side (free or small fee for helping buyer). After all, someone has to prepare the contract and it's not going to be the buyer themselves. 3. There will be more company benefiting from home showing services. (Someone or some technology to show buyer to enter a house without an agent. ) 4. More buyer going to use an attorney to do contract. 5. Buyer charging fee per each showing, contract, consulting..etc... 6.. for those buyer agent who can adjust to the new game rule will survive with more opportunities while more buyer agent forced to n leave the industry.
real estate agents do very little. in fact i advise everyone not to listen to them. their goal is to finish everything fast to get the commission. They do not prepare contracts. they nearly write stuff in a previously prepared contract. they use same template over and over. Most agents should be paid 1000 max.
@@elisabeth_RealEstateAssassin yes. very briefly to undersrand that they follow the same path every time. any issues they go to a broker. and a contract basically the same template prepared by attorneys for the state.
Re. Buyers Agent Agreement........ Since this is a contract I believe it can be cancelled if both parties agree and re-written to match the commission the seller is willing to pay for a buyer agent.
The buyers agents do MOST of the work. Buyers agents DESERVE more than the listing agents. The listing agents need to keep this in mind or they are going to end up showing their own listing 30 times which means you are now working just as hard as the buyers agent for the same pay. Listing agents NEED to protect the full commissions just as they always have.
Great buyer's agent EARN their commission in gold. That said, the proposed law will change the way agents do business and I believe listing agents will negotiate their commission with the seller and leave buyer's agent commission open for negotiation when they submit an offer. Listing agents will also need to adapt and may need showing agents on their team to show properties. Listing agents may also negotiate a higher commission if they handle the whole transaction. Every agent has a choice on how to conduct their business and they are able to work with buyers, sellers, or both. I personally negotiated a buyer's commission with hundreds of sellers per year because it was the best thing for my sellers at the time.
look the scenario will be the seller signs a 3% commission, the buyer's agent has a signed 2%, they look at your house. The Offer, the seller picks up the 2% buyer's commission. The listing agent tells you this is the best offer you have had , in the end the seller ends up paying 5%. These folks will train their agents to play good guy bad guy. Sellers must only sign no higher than a 2.5%. This way you have room to deal, since you know all buyers', agents will try to get the Sellers to pay their buyer's commission again. If a buyer agent tells you in their offer, they have a 2% contract you counter with a spilt pay 1% and this way you pay no more than 3.5%. Otherwise, nothing has changed for the seller?
@@chrisaldridge6793 Hi Chris if it were me, I would do no higher than 2.5% to assure the sellers have room to negotiate to pick up the buyers' commission to make the deal. Nobody will find out the buyer's contract now till you enter in an offer with the buyer's agent. This could end like the car business many don't understand the game and the sellers concede let's say 2.5% to buyers they end up paying 5% so where was the difference from before the lawsuit? Sellers will only make out if they realize they can't sell at the same commission as a buyer's agent. The buyer's agent will just have to take a little less to make the deal, sellers should never concede more than 2% to a buyer's agent from now on. In the end most sellers will pay about 2.5% maybe 3% to listing agent and concede nothing, or if they must sell up to 4.5% total to close the deal. Sounds confusing but it is not really, again like a car deal the agents will try to confuse the sellers to get more.
Buyers Agent : I don’t know what’s going on? Buyer: I don’t either Seller: Hey! I’ll run the Show ! Listing Agent: Do you need my help? Seller: I’m not sure… I’m confused
You didn’t talk about buyers being able to finance commissions. You will likely see banks roll out new plans that allow for higher credit amounts for concessions then they are allowed to now with limits.
You've totally bought into the lie. The truth is that my seller will get the absolute best buyer when represented and a commission is given bottom line. Trying to be cheap on the commission will lose you net net bottom line money
So does this mean this is the end of double ending deals now? And not getting 5 or 6 % for a deal if you double ended it becuase buyer agents don’t have to necessarily get paid anymore?
I hope the local Realtor Boards and NAR reduce their Board fees since they choose to settle the lawsuit instead of fighting for just compensation on behalf of buyers agents.
I believe this whole lawsuit was to push down commissions. There is already a fair number who think it is saving them and giving an advantage by going direct to sellers agent. Many sellers agents want to double end.
The way I see it, FSBO almost always sell for less, right? How is this any different? When buyers know they will have to pay a commission they will deduct that from their offer or add it as a sellers concessions. I think sellers need to understand they are potentially shut out great buyers. And yes…. Buyers can go to the listing agent, but if the seller isn’t paying for a buyers agent, they are not paying the listing agent either for buyer. The listing agent will do twice the work for half the money.
@@brlyalveright but there’s other ways as well. I watched another video and they were basically stating how because of this new change we would really not need NAR or MLS. Like use Zillow instead that’s what the buyers are going to do if they aren’t using a buyers agent
@@brlyalve if the MLS doesn’t offer compensation for buyers agents people are going to eventually create their own listing marketing tool so they can offer it.
It might be better to get the info from a Real Estate attorney who has actually read the NAR proposed settlement agreement. There are a few here on RUclips.
Great video! agents desperately want to convince themselves that the consumer doesn’t know how to do research on the home they want to buy. There is dual agency in most states and I bet 75% of consumers are going to go that route. The consumer today is not the same as the consumer many years ago. There are many tools to do research on the area that you want to live. No one says that agents shouldn’t get a commission. The problem is do they always deserve the highest commission? That answer would be h*ll no! The fact is, buyers agents are going to have to compete, and that means more times than not for less than what they’re used to. They will either fall in line or drop off.
I think there is at least one good thing to this which is a lot of terrible buyer agents, of which there are many, will go away. Good listing agents won’t have any issues and will likely get more business.
@@laylabono4035Does not make you special, be real. You look at a database. It’s not rocket science. Also the database is going through its own lawsuit for collusion to artificially inflate prices. 95% of homes sold are listed through MLS which is owned by NAR. Perfect recipe for corruption.
This is where it confuses me because doesn’t the buyer pay the money anyway? For example, if the Listing Agent charge 6% and split the other three with the buyers agent, doesn’t the buyer pay that money to the sellers in the beginning to purchase the home and it only comes out at closing to the listing and buyers agent? So, if the listing agent charges 3% and you tell your buyer that they have to pay 3%, they’re still paying 6% either way . I was told in Real Estate school that the price of a home is determined by whatever a buyer is willing to pay so technically there won’t be 6% or any percent if the buyer didn’t pay it to the seller. The buyer has always paid this fee. This is a win for the sellers because if they don’t have to pay a extra 3% from what the buyer gave them originally then they walk away with more money but either way it goes the buyer has always paid their agent commission, regardless, if it transferred to the sellers Hand first or not. The only thing I see different is, how its put down on paper.
It is a win for the seller however the seller pays the commission. A buyer pays the true value in the marketplace regardless of commission. Since the seller negotiates the commission its market value that dictates price regardless of that commission. It's all about exposure to max number of potential buyers and that costs the listing agent to properly advertize.
Bye bye bye mediocre realtors. I’m glad to pay a commission if the realtor is knowledgeable and honest (They exist). This will change the real estate industry and make companies such as Zillow, opendoor, etc. more competitive and stronger. Only time will tell the real impact of this historic settlement.
I honestly see this a one big nothing-burger. Commissions are negotiable, always has been. Brokers taking 1%, flat fee, happens all the time. It has always been up to the brokers' discretion...just like it is now. Brokers lowering their commissions just to make their clients offer more appealing to the seller, happens ALL the time. The only thing that will lower your commission as an agent is if you panic at this news and decide to lower your own commission. That's it.
Penalty to Realtors should be bigger amount of money, they monopolize the listing, and the comssion is extremely high. The Realtors should be demanded for 100 billion dollars. Bye.
Most buyers I meet, do not want to work with the listing agent directly and would rather have a buyers agent that will show them multiple homes with no pressure! This is a real effort to do away with buyer agency, and its sad because its a service people want but now they may have to pay for. At the same time buyers agents will not work for free. There's many high paying hourly jobs out there these days. Maybe buyers agents should go on strike? Listing agents are you ready for that? Listing agents really don't want to mess with buyers anyhow, right? Why would you, because it distracts you from doing the work of getting more listings. When the worker bees die, the Queen bee dies! Think about that for a minute..Listing agents will be begging their sellers to pay the buyers agent a fair compensation that is competitive. They should anyway since that will get more buyers agents and buyers through their door and get them the most for their home. There has to be an incentive for agents to work, and buyers agency needs to exist, or the listing agents will be overworked with no vacation even if you have a team. Have fun with that!😮
Less buyers will reduce demand. More listings will increase supply. As a result, the prices will go down. It is the supply and demand.@@RealEstateCoach
Also Jackie so basically just never become a buyer agent cuz it just got worse and just continue to be a listing agent right Jackie ? Listing agents are basically safe from all this non sense ?
If agents start doing all this crazy stuff it's them missing up the industry. Just keep doing business as usual. It only states don't put the commission in the MLS and people went crazy with smart ideas.
Listing agents will now only negotiate their commission and set expectations on possible buyer commissions if/when they receive a contract from an agent.
@@RealEstateCoach Right, that's why I said this lawsuit has no impact on the industry other than the commission can't be entered in the MLS. Any other changes will come from agents.
It doesn’t change things much. Commissions negotiated off mls now and sellers can still offer buy side. The negative click bait headlines from media will do more damage than the ruling itself.
Listing agents negotiated commissions upfront for buyers agents. Now buyers need to negotiate their commission from the seller (having less leverage) or have their buyer pay it. How many buyers will pay $5k - $25k for buyer representation?
Correct, but the ruling doesn't get rid of the sellers being able to provide compensation. Just makes it a transparent choice and negotiated between their agents or parties off MLS. NAR: "Offers of compensation could continue to be an option consumers can pursue off-MLS through negotiation and consultation with real estate professionals. And sellers can offer buyer concessions on an MLS (for example-concessions for buyer closing costs)." Most buyers agents will have to negotiate for their clients to get it covered by the sell side in the offer, while also protecting their value in the case the seller won't. Just being able to get a buyer and open doors to make money wont be as easy as it once was. There will likely be less agents in the field opening opportunity for the pros who can negotiation their value on the buy side and sell side. I don't foresee sellers loosing home sales due to a buy side commission in an offer if its strong and articulated with proper expectations on both sides.@@RealEstateCoach
This is a positive scenario and opportunity for building a strong listing based business. If you work with buyers as I do sometimes, we will just have to negotiate buy side commissions into the offer somehow and negotiate when a seller doesn't automatically offer it. I always told buyers agents its important to get listings as it builds job security. There will be less competition among agents due to this and for those who are positive they will do fantastic. @@RealEstateCoach
Sellers lose when lawsuits arise from unrepresented buyers feel taken advantage of. Seller agents lose with more time taken to show own listings and work paperwork fir unrepresented buyers. Will end up with fewer listings from the time loss. Only real winners are the lawyers. Still, I'm hopeful that seller agents will prep sellers on the value of buyer agents. The rules are changing. Learn the rules so you can go out there and crush it!
Buyers are going to be paying prices that reflect a price that was based on a property where a seller was compensating the buyers agent. In theory, the buyer should get the house under a comps price by 2%-3%
several properties and all that time invested (wasted). It will be easier to filter the serious from the non serious buyers. My personal opinion. Thank you Jackie.
Little late to this discussion. I was a Realtor until about a year ago in PA. I was primarily a buyer agent. I usually worked with working folks, 90k to 250k range. When the interest rates started increasing, my clients all pretty much stopped looking. Now, this is a double whammy asking these buyers, who mostly struggled to come up with down payments, etc who often needed seller assist, to also pay the buyer agent. I always used a buyers agreement, but it was more or less a formality as the seller paid the commission. I actually had to walk away from clients as they didn't see any value in my services and would just contact the list agent. I also had shifty list agents who who kept 3.5% out of 6% instead of an even split. So glad I got out when I did, this is going to be chaos.
Or maybe the buyers agents could charge reasonable fees like $1k
@@zz5guy the agent on either side of the sale doesn't get the full commission. Depending on the split, the broker takes anywhere from 50% to 20%. Also, the broker takes a flat fee per transaction for marketing, MLS and "processing". Also, many times there is a referral fee, anywhere from 25% to 35%. As a matter of fact, buyers/sellers BY LAW cannot directly pay the agents. The money is paid to the broker, then distributed. At my last broker, $1000, even without a referral, I would have ended up with probably around $350 to $400. Also, there is gas money to take into account, which can add up quickly.
@@zz5guydo you know how much work goes into a deal? how much is spent on gas alone?
This reply is for the guy that says $1000 is enough… Are you serious? What about retirement savings and all the other expenses associated with not having a salary and being present in financially responsible for your family. In the old way of 6%, 90% of agents were still failing. This will only favor Wall Street firms who will offer no hassle deals online through platforms. I am starting to believe that baby boomers are the worst generation ever. They left the country worse than they received it. This is very sad
No, the listing broker paid your commission, and the buyer paid it in the overall sales price.
When I moved from Tucson to Oregon, I pretty much had to use a buyer's agent because houses were flying off the market. We also had a very limited time to look at houses when we came up here specifically for that, so having a buyer's agent organize our visit so we could see as many houses as possible. It was still rough. We must have looked at a couple of dozen houses, several of which sold before we even had a chance to put an offer in. I'm not crazy about the house we ended up with, but it was the best one for what we could afford at the time. I believe that having a buyer's agent for this experience was absolutely mandatory.
Well pretty soon you will be organizing it yourself, with a listing agent, and if you want to buy it, you will have to agree to Intermediary relationship, of which the Realtor will be a party to 10 other law suits because the seller had an advantage by establishing a relationship first with their neighbor, friends, family, referral etc. and the buyer was completely neutral and taken advantage of. Fiduciary duty must become a thing of the past, and the code of ethics has to shrink to one page, called "Canons Code to not getting sued." I expect hundres of thousands of Realtors will change careers by choice or force, and NAR will open the MLS up to the public and charge them to look and charge them to post their own homes. This road only goes slowly down hill for the consumer, and Realtors. Its FSBO or intermediary going forward, and homes will sell so fast with a coming soon sign, you will wonder why you pay HAR $1,200 a year for.
One thing no one has talked about is the listing agent now has to do all the showings..write up offers from buyers they don’t represent, and work directly with their lenders to make sure everything is on track…and they want us to work for the same or lower commission? 😳
This is what I've been saying. How many buyers won't even be qualified yet want to get a tour. The buyers are going to flood seller agents with questions. They are going to have to come up with a way that the buyer can tour the house on their own or have some paid to open the door.
Listing agents will have leverage to negotiate higher commissions to represent both sides.
@@chrisz7083yep! Forgot about the buyers not even being qualified or knowing what it means to be qualified..we expect these people to represent themselves? yea it’s gonna be a cluster. Then 10 years from now we will have a lawsuit that buyers need representation.
@RealEstateCoach Problem I see is that the buyers agent will need to get an agreement prior to even showing a place. They wont know if the sellers agents were able to negotiate that prior to looking at homes. The buyer could always say, "Look, the only homes we can buy are the ones where the seller pays both agents." Many buyers , even if they want to pay the buyers agent, really can't because of all the other costs.
@@RealEstateCoach I agree…but the first year is going to be a race to the bottom. Then things will sort themselves out and commissions will come back up.
Since the announcement was made I’ve watched dozens of commentary and I have to say your video has been the most objective and informative. Thanks so much for this!
Thank you and you are very welcome!
We have ALWAYS signed buyer agency agreements with our buyers before we show them any properties, and have been for 16 years!
Great Job! Listing agents have long negotiated the commission upfront. That is about to change. Buyers agent commission will most likely be another negotiation in the contract and the buyers agent will have little leverage. How often has your commission been paid by the buyer?
I’m sure realtors want a buyers agreement to sign - I fully see flat rate fees coming online. My ex-realtor drives a new BMW each year.
Don't sign a buyers agreement. I was almost tricked into it.
You are the rare bird. In my area, BA jump in the car with people with no buyer agreement, no pre-approval, and frequently can’t even tell me what their buyer is looking for. It’s very frustrating because they want to waste my time as well. I sell new construction and we attend all of our showings to demonstrate our homes. I hope there are significant changes.
On my last deal, I added an addendum to the Buyer-broker agreement stating my 3% commission could be lowered to 2% if the Seller was unwilling or unable to pay the commission. Everything below 2% would be the buyer's responsibility.
Didn't NAR state a few months ago that they wouldn't settle and would continue to fight? Is it just me or does anyone else feel betrayed? Did anyone else watch the trial? Specifically when they were cross examining the plantiff? Didn't anyone else see how much they held back? This is ridiculous and will certainly negatively impact buyers in the long run...waiting for the next lawsuit.
Push came to shove because the lawsuits were becoming endless.
Just think (if you can) that if the figure were maybe 4.5% like the next highest in the world, Germany's, you might have stayed under the radar.
They would have had to post billions in bond to appeal. They chose to settle and not go bankrupt.
So many other countries charge 6%. Portugal is a European country that charges 6% Brazil is a South American country that charges 6%. The US is the North American country that used to charge 6%. The reason for this lawsuit is Wall Street.
And NAR was losing all of them. And buyers lawsuits are going down, too.
in Portugal the seller always pay the commission and the buyers never pay. the listing agents split the seller commission 50% with the buyer agents.
That's the whole lawsuit.
@@sportsman4545 no it's not. the seller can't even pay 2 comissions. it's always one. to the sellers agent. it's up for the seller agent to decide if it splits and how to split. no buyers ever pay anything to the buyer agents. neither buyer agents ever receive anything from the sellers. this NAR settlement is completely different.
doesn't work the same way
@PedroSilva-he6mf well it's changed now and buyer fees and seller fees are negotiable.
@@sportsman4545 it was always negotiable here. and it was always illegal to receive comissions from both sides of the deal. you could in theory make the buyer pay the full comission but it never happens. there's no such thing as a buyer agreement contract. there's no NAR equivalent and there's no MLS and some agents and brands don't split the deal with other agents which harms everyone. so, very different world. you also don't need a license. kinda crazy.
why buyer and seller fees weren't negotiable? kinda confusing to me
Hey Jackie, One thing I was thinking that could happen, if sellers feel they do not have to pay a buyer agent commission, we could see more homeowners come on the market causing a glut of homes that sit and expire causing home prices to eventually fall as it becomes a buyers market. It will be interesting to see how things evolve in the coming months!
The only one benefitting from this settlement is the law firm that is collecting 30% to 40% commission. It’s not going to benefit buyers or sellers. Not disclosing buyers agent commission in the MLS doesn’t serve any useful purpose but it’s going to result in a lot more phone calls to listing agents regarding buyers agents compensation. If the buyer has to pay his agent a fee it can’t be rolled into his loan as is presently done. How does this benefit the buyer? It doesn’t. Look for a lot more dual agent lawsuits.
And all of the extra work lawyers will receive because buyers are forgoing agents and using lawyers to handle paperwork.
Why should an agent get twice and much for selling a $250k vs. $500k home? Is the paperwork not the same? Greed, pure and simple.
Yes its greed but who isnt greedy? Yo mama?
There is a lot of work that goes into being a real estate agent. Your comments reflects your lack of understanding and hardships every real estate agent faces.
@@augustoliver2779 So you are saying that it is twice as much work to sell a $500k home vs. a $250k home.
@@fordilacWhere do you draw the line? Do you think there is the same amount of work and expertise to sell a million dollar home as there is to selling a $50,000? Where’s your line? And if you are drawing a line, how are you justifying price fixing? Do all attorneys charge the same? Do all plumbers charge the same? Do all cars cost the same? Commissions are negotiable. Always have been. If the agent charges more than the customer is willing to pay, then the customer can choose another agent in their price range. Just like you can choose another attorney, hair stylist, plumber or car.
With your logic, all car salespersons, or any salesperson for that matter, should make the exact same, no matter the vehicle or other items. What about stockbrokers? Do you tip 50% at a cheap diner where you’re receiving the exact same service at a nicer restaurant?
My thoughts about the NAR lawsuit and upcoming changes in our industry, and how things should be moving forward: First, I think that all representation deserves compensation. Buyers should think about saving money to afford themselves representation, and if they find a property where the commission would be covered they can use their funds otherwise. This would make for stronger Buyers and would set boundaries between both parties. Just my two cents.
Hi Jackie, was waiting for you to speak about this matter since so many other people have some many opinions . I only trust you !
Thank you .
Thank you so much!
The whole lawsuit was garbage, except if there was no disclosure in the listing contract. Commission has always been negotiable and here in in California, the seller is made aware that the listing broker intends to share the commission with the buyer’s agent. As long as the seller signs that agreement, there’s no reason to complain about how the listing broker disburses the commission. Not displaying it in the MLS is shady, if the seller wants to sell, pay for the service of the buyer’s agent, who actually has the responsibility of ensuring the deal closes. Maybe owners should just advertise their homes first sale and buyers can contact them directly, that way they wouldn’t have to pay commission. An agent who has a buyer can approach the seller and do a ‘one party’ show and sign a contract with seller allowing agent to show the property for a negotiated fee, either a flat fee or a percentage between 2-3 percent. It’s not complicated.
Everyone knows a FSBO is looking to save the commission and a FSBO buyer is looking for a deal Always leaves money on the table even if they brag they sold it themselves. Limited exposure to cheap buyers.
Thank you for this. You brought up a lot of good points that no one else is talking about🙏❤️
I’m glad to see this, no reason to pay 6% when homes sells in less than a week.
if you get a shitty agent that agrees with less than 6% you are sure to lose more than 6%. a good agent will defend your best interests and will get more money in your pocket even after you paying the 6%.
I'm looking at buying a $1M+ home. I will NOT pay an agent 30K to walk me into a house (that I found on Zillow) and to send me some docu-signs in an e-mail. NO WAY.
how do you think the seller feels about that??? even more defiant!
I won't either, I will represent myself and up the seller percentage to swipe in and get the property... ;)
Astute Listing agents will thrive regardless as complexity premium just makes it more of a proverbial shark tank to sub 115 IQ buyers and 'lion seal' agents)
Good luck with that.
@digitalpacs as an agent who represents sellers, they do no want to entertain offers from self represented buyers. Too risky.
I believe that when buyer asks seller - through purchase offer - to pay (as in your example) 2.5% and the seller comes back and say "no, but will pay 1.5%) - at this point I do not see buyer on the hook as they just received a counter offer which they do not need to accept. They can now negotiate with their agent or they can counter the seller's counter. Here could be the rub - in that scenario the buyer now knows how much the seller is willing to pay of the buyer's commission. If the buyer's agent will not renegotiate with their buying client, you may see buyers trying to end their representation and getting themselves a new agent. Currently, most agents working will a BBA will let their buyer's out if their buyer states they don't have rapport or trust in the agent.
Savy sellers understand they need a represented buyer. Liability is too risky.
There is alot of difference in this market due to internet. I think that is huge and the industry need to recognize this. The internet has made home shopping easier and eliminates alot of leg work for the agent.
Thanks Jackie! So I had a thought...if a buyer gies directly to the listing agent, and the NAR agreement says a buyer has to sign a buyer's agreement, would they have to sign one with the listing agent? How might that work??
An unrepresented buyer doesn’t need to sign any agency agreement because there is no agent working on their behalf.
My experience is a seller is eager to pay buyers commission in order to attract agents to the home. If commission is 0, it becones a negative. Now, buyers agents have to say I'm worth it. If you want the home, there you go.
I realize that it was a misstatement when you said the NAR settlement was 4.18 million instead of 418 million dollars. If a buyer calls the listing agent directly, it sets up a duel agency situation. If the seller is only paying the listing agent commission, and a buyer goes to the listing agent, will they need to have the buyer sign a buyers agreement as well? If that is the case it will make the duel agency a real problem.
Many buyers will be unrepresented.
@@LauraStoddardTNThat will create a bigger problem than what the lawsuit was intended to solve. For sale by owner may not be as difficult as a buyer without an agent. Who writes the offer? Does an uninformed buyer know to set up time for home inspections? When do you need a radon inspection? Who sets up the appraisal? Do you go with a basic or extended title insurance? Who sets up the closing? When does the buyer receive an estimate of closing? How do you as an unrepresented buyer visit properties?
Correct, wvery buyer represented requires a buyer brokers agreement.
I represent sellers and they have zero interest in unrepresented buyers because of liability@LauraStoddardTN
The market is a greedy mess and we all know it!!!
Agreed!!! On point. Well covered....delivered by one of our industries BEST!! There is one thing though Jackie. I think the market potentially COILD be impacted negatively in regards to prices slowing or even dropping in some markets because of this impact. The reasoning being leading up to July and in the subsequent 6-12 month...I believe...there will be confusion, settling and discovery on all sides, Buyers/Sellers, Buyers Agenrs/Listing Agents on how to deal with the multitude of variables that could play out on who pays what, why and how. Limited mindsets, scarcity, lack of skills all I see playing a part in the mess that I see playing out whoch then leads to slower decision making and less transactions through this awkward period...causing prices to fall as homes take even longer to sell because of less prepare and less willing Buyers. I don't see it being catastrophic...but I could see a slowing and negative impact at least moderately in values especially in areas like Austin TX where I am, where the market is still struggling! You're the Best Jackie!! Keep up the great work!!
Hey Paul, I agree that there will be confusion and it could temporary slow things down. Being the master that you are, I'm sure you'd agree that knowledgeable, professional and skilled listing agents will shine regardless of what direction this all takes.
YES!!!!!!!!!!!@@RealEstateCoach
i do agree - commission are way to high! 100% - in UK they average 2% not 5-6% like the monopoly wall in the US
is that for the listing agent only? If they have to split that between two agents thats horrible!
The best explanation and assessment Jackie: I sent the link to many folks interested in this with several luxury properties will be on the block for family trust. SUBSCRIBED. Thank you. Matcha served as appreciation. 🍵🎏
This change is just so stupid. So basically they say do what you used to do just don't put it on the damn MLS. Put the commission on social media, website, via phone call, email, message, seller agreement form except MLS!!! That doesn't make any sense. What kind of stupid court judges and law makers we have in the US?
Nice recap with more realistic seller and buyer insights. Most sellers will not agree to pay buyers agent who is primarily working for the Buyer. Many buyers will not use an agent and deal directly with listing agent when they find out previously free services are now potentially tens of thousands of dollars.
Buyers have already been paying the commissions when they pay the price of the home. Buyers gives sellers the money/price which closing costs come out of. Sold comps have buyers commissions figured in.
My buyers haven’t. Actually, what I’m saying is the price of the homes, up to this point, have already factored in all the commissions including buyer’s commissions, which is part of the seller’s closing costs. Buyers are paying those prices. Values are based on sold comps which have included all commissions in Seller’s closing costs. I think this may encourage unrepresented buyers or dual agency, which isn’t good in my opinion, and may soften buyer demand. It’s a life event market right now, a lot of first time home buyers. Now this ruling could make even more expensive for buyers. Something we’ll have to figure out in the coming months.
True. But this brings up a separate issue that the prices of MLS listed properties will be somewhat higher than FSBO sales of comparable properties. This is a market distortion that artificially inflates prices. So separating the buyer's agent commission from the sale price creates a more efficient and accurate market for appraisers.
@@tylerjohnson415 my point exactly 👍🏾 👍🏾. It is the buyer that determines the value at the end of the day. I spoke real estate for years and even I figured that out within my first year selling real estate.
It's a nice video - thanks. I can imagine a scenario where life gets harder for listing agents also. Two offers come in. The offer represented by an agent is lower. So, the seller accepts the high offer that is not represented by an agent. The buyers representing themselves can't get the loan, the inspections, understand title reports, etc., in time to release contingencies. Sellers have to cancel and go back to a softening market, after two weeks off.
I sell new construction only and in the interest of getting the job done, we deal directly with our buyers, their lender, their title company, and we show and demonstrate all our homes features. I have always found the BA does very little and we close many homes without hiccups with no BA. The vast majority of BA show up for the contract, and disappear until closing, which is 9 months in between and many on site meetings with the buyers. We invite them to all meetings, by and large they are MIA until settlement and commission check. If buyers have to pay for that out of their own pocket it will be quite comical to see the pushback. Right now buyers don’t care much because they have been trained by the real estate industry that the buyers agent is free, wait until they realize it never was. 😂😂
This is so interesting that we are hearing several real estate coaches talk buyer engagement contract. We have had them in Georgia for a long time and they have always included the compensation. This is nothing new here, and will be mostly business as usual, with the exception of the advertising of the buy commission on MLS.
Great Job! Listing agents have long negotiated the commission upfront. That is about to change. Buyers agent commission will most likely be another negotiation in the contract and the buyers agent will have little leverage. How often has your commission been paid by the buyer?
The buyer agreement agreement is nothing new but buyer’s paying their own commission is. There was very little financial risk for a buyer signing these since their commission was covered by the listing agent 99.9% to the time.
@@kristensimpsonrealtor I think it’s going to have more effect on the rest of the country that it is on the state of Georgia. Our MLS systems are not affiliated with national Association of realtors, and therefore are not held under the settlement agreement that is being negotiated by. NAR. In addition, it has never been a requirement to add any sort of compensation onto the MLS system. When properties were flying off of the market in 2021 and 2022 there were multiple selling agents that put 0% or just did not add it into the MLS. I believe the solutions are actually a little bit simpler, and we are making more out of this than is necessary. there are other ways listing agents can advertise a buyers agent commission. It is up to us as real estate professionals to educate our clients as that is what is best in terms of getting their house sold for the highest price possible. The point I’m making is we have already been doing some of these things in the state of Georgia and I may be wrong about this, so please do your own due diligence, but I know the state of Washington has not been allowed to put commissions onto their MLS, and from what I understand they are doing just fine up there.
Nothing to worry about. The industry will adjust like it always has done before. As an agent, you need to always communicate your value proposition to your clients.
Nothing to worry about just 50% of realtors getting out of the business and everyone having their income reduced dramatically get your head out of the sand
@@chris1roche where are you getting this information from?
Good luck lol. When did the industry ever have to adjust to a complete change in compensation?
Are you aware that there are also lawsuits from buyers not wanting to pay the listing agents commission is the purchase price?
Thanks great info
That is a correct statement, buyers or listing agents don't do much of anything to earn the commission. In fact agents know very little about real estate. Licensing class teaches you rules and regs and paperwork, nothing about real estate.
Not my sellers and buyers.
I will survive no matter what... I am an expert 😃 Don't worry realtors..This is just a change.
Every agent committee to mastering their skills and mindset will make more money than ever.
Those home sellers should have been asked only 1 question: Who paid their agent's commission when they bought their property? The end
You’re the exception. The end
I'm predominately a Listing Agent (LA) and in the State of FL I work as a Single Agency Broker. I always tell the Seller that the real estate commissions are negotiable. As a LA what would you say to the unrepresented Buyer who bypasses a Buyer Agent and wants to write their offer through me the LA? Obviously the Buyer doesn't want to pay a commission. Would you suggest as the LA we negotiate the commission directly with the Buyer? Could I ask them to compensate me with a flat fee of $$$$$ or pay me a % of the purchase price to write the offer? As a single agency agent in FL, I must ask the Seller and have both parties sign the Consent to Transition into a Transaction Broker in order to represent both parties. In my opinion, being a strong negotiator to negotiate commission fees will weed out the premier agents from the agents who will ultimately exit this industry.
Absolutely!!! Listing agents should set the right expectations at the listing presentation and possibly negotiate a higher commission for handling both sides of the transaction.
With the new commission rule in place in July, can a Listing Broker compensate the Buyer's Broker directly with the Seller's approval? If I can negotiate a 5% Listing Broker fee with the Seller can I split my commission with the Buyer's Broker, can pay the Buyer's Broker 2.5% commission out of my Listing Broker's fee? Will that be allowed with the new rules?
@@RealEstateCoach
If the buyer is unrepresented, as the listing agent/broker you are home free. You get the full commission. Where's the problem?
Thank you Jackie! I was interested to hear your opinion on all of this. Thank you!
You are so welcome!
Jackie luv your input so would an option for buyers agent be that if a buyer does not have enough to pay the commission can that be raised from the price of the property to where it off sets the commission and it’s financed and added to their mortgage so the agent gets paid at closing. I hope I explained it correctly.
The buyer must agree to agent commission upfront. It then becomes the agents responsibility to negotiate the commission from the seller. If the seller doesn’t agree the buyer is then expected to pay. If the appraisal is more than the purchase price it would be an option to increase the purchase price and finance the commission. This creates other challenges for the buyer.
@@RealEstateCoach A lender may not allow a buyer agent fee to be rolled into the mortgage.
@@RealEstateCoach right, and then it could effect the appraisal.
I see listing agent fees going up a bit over time, and over 50% of buyer agent business going away after agents get through all the stages of grief (agents are currently in the initial Denial phase; can hear it in their arguments). Once agents get to the Anger phase, they’ll take it out on everyone. Acceptance will result in a mass exodus.
Listing agents will win.
Great info. Spot on. The agents who have the skill set will make more money and the agents who don’t will lose money or quit the business. My only question is what happens when you have a listing agreement signed before July at 6% and the seller agrees to pay a buyer agent 3%. Will those be grandfathered in or will you have to renegotiate the full commission once July hits?
It won't affect the seller side in terms of the full commission. The seller's broker will simply need to remove the 3% from the MLS.
Forms to sign
@@viralsheddingzombie5324MLS removes it but there are specific forms for those caught in transition. No big deal
I think if the Buyer wants to make sure they have representation then this will go over fine. It's those that think they need no representation and fell the Seller Agent will take care of the Buyer, and that's not the case. Seller agent is for the seller not buyer, with this rule or not that remans the same. Once buyers start getting screwed over by the Seller agents we will have lawsuits once again for no representation when the buyer wouldn't work with someone to represent them and make sure everything was done accordingly and no problems with anything. Seller agents have their place, buyer agents have their place for those that know and understand what a buyer agent does... It will just take time to work itself out.
It’s really simple. The Buyer hires their own Realtor or Advisor or Attorney, and they pay that person. The glitch is it is going to hurt first time Buyers who don’t have much money. If you’re selling a 900 thousand dollar house, whoever is buying a house at that price can afford to pay for their own Broker.
Ultimately, all Broker commissions come out of the same pool of money it doesn't matter if the check is issued by the seller's side or the buyers side. If there is a buyer's agent that amount is going to end up getting worked into the purchase price being offered. You will have a gross purchase price and a net purchase price after the buyer agent commission is deducted. All this is going to do is create new forms that need to be filled out, an exclusivity in buyer representation, and a re-working in how purchase offers are worded. It's going to create different options for buyer agent payouts.
Imagine the lawsuits that are about to happen! My guess is 60% of the lawsuits will be from buyers who feel the seller accepted a lower offer than theirs. Also a huge portion of lawsuits will be from sellers that find out the listing agent withheld a better offer because the better offer requested less commission.
Sellers do not have to accept the highest offer. This happened to me several times as a buyer agent. For example, if the lower offer was cash. Sometimes it was the type of loan the buyer had. Sometimes the seller was nervous about an appraisal that may not come thru. Sometimes other buyers may be willing to skip inspection and repairs. It really is a case by case situation.
In advance of any showings how can I determine how much work and hours I will put in for a buyer? 1 house or 36 homes? Title issues, financial issues, inspection issues. This is a hot mess.
You mean buyer's agents will have to expect to work for their hefty commissions?
The root of the problem is that real estate agents are independent contractors, and not employees. As an IC, each agent is responsible for ALL aspects of their business - everybody is good at something, but very few people are competent enough at the wide array of skills required to succeed in real estate, and that's why 80% of agents only survive 2 years in the business. Having each agent do everything is like replacing the assembly line at General Motors, and having each person follow the frame down the assembly line, 1st putting the wheels on, then attaching the engine, then the seats, and then the body and windows... HUGELY inefficient! The real estate industry is decades (or centuries) behind the rest of the economy! Changing to an employee-based structure can dramatically improve efficiency, and reduce the cost of marketing and closing real estate by 50-90%! The National Assoc. of REALTORS has no incentive to improve efficiency, because they collect more dues based on their membership numbers, and if their membership drops 90% they'll be hurting big-time!
Thank you for this excellent breakdown. I see the public being more skeptical of BAAs.
Completely disagree. The listing agents are going to educate the seller the value of offering a commission to the buying agent. By offering no commission to remove a large amount of your buyers pool. They will factor in the price into the sale price before they list.
Listing agents not negotiating a commission for a buyer’s agent upfront does not mean a seller is opposed to paying a commission. Sellers will ultimately choose the best offer that nets them the most amount of money. A Buyer’s agent is able to justify ANY commission so long as it’s the best offer from what the seller has to choose from.
Thank you Jackie 🙏🙏🙏🙏
Another thing to negotiate, along with closing costs, inspections , repairs, items that stay & closing date.
Washington state just rolled out a new buyer agency agreement January1st in anticipation of this settlement- however if the SOC is more than agreed there are options that I guess will no longer be …
Seller's Offer is greater than the Compensation,
✅Buyer shall 4 accept Seller's Offer and Buyer shall not be obligated ot separately pay Firm.
✅The amount of Seller's Ofer that is greater than the Compensation shall be:
▫️Paid to Firm;
▫️Credited to Buyer (to the extent allowed by Buyer's lender) and any non-allowed amount paid to Firm;
▫️Credited to the seller; or
▫️Other:
I see lots of realtors dropping their licenses in the very near future. No one is going to work for free. Agents who don’t provide value except for opening the Supra’s won’t be able to compete with real professionals.
I always signed buyers rep agreement AND had them pre-approved prior to showings.
Thank you for the detailed information . You look pretty 😊.
The changes resulting from this lawsuit are significantly disadvantageous, exemplifying another instance where decisions have primarily favored the interests of the baby boomer generation, often at the expense of others. Agents play a crucial role, effectively representing the needs and interests of both buyers and sellers, highlighting their importance in every aspect of the transaction.
Excellent Jackie! Thank you!!
You're welcome!
Mr Seller -- you're paying me X% for my listing service. I'm going to give X% of my commission you are paying me to any other agent appropriately licensed whatever percentage I'd like from the % you give ME for my service. Nothing has changed except Media gone wild. What else is new. Buyer agents will call me before showing and ask if we are offering commission. I'll let them know how much of my commission I'm willing to share with them to bring their buyer. The only thing that has changed is I'm not putting that on the MLS and I'm having buyer's sign agency agreements.
😂😂😂Nope, the whole thing decouples the commission split. It’s not up to you to determine how much of your brokerage commission goes to the BA. Some folks never learn. 🤦♀️
Wrong. I can give a buyer's agent whatever amount I'm paid by another period. You can't tell me what I do with my money. Have a great day!
If a buyer calls a lawyer for the lawyer to draft the contract and the lawyer charges let’s say $1,000. If the buyer sends the offer and for some reason don’t get the house they will be down $1,000 and still no house. Also who’s going to show the homes? If the buyers don’t want to sign the agreement because they don’t want to pay the BA who will show them the homes? Will listing agents have to became transaction brokers more often? Will the listing agent have to negóciate a comisión as a single agent and in the event he has to become a transaction broker a higher commission will have to be negotiated? So many questions 😂 time will tell
$1,000 to draft a contract that takes a little amount of time? Sounds like bullshit to me
@@wb2605looks like you’ve never met with a lawyer.
+ they charge for each addendum, each disclosures and totally it becomes 20K☺@@wb2605ruclips.net/user/sgaming/emoji/7ff574f2/emoji_u1f603.png
I think these are what's going to happen:
1. House price going to go down a bit for a short time because the seller do not have to pay for buyer agent.
2. For those states that allow dual agency, the listing agent will ended up representing both side (free or small fee for helping buyer). After all, someone has to prepare the contract and it's not going to be the buyer themselves.
3. There will be more company benefiting from home showing services. (Someone or some technology to show buyer to enter a house without an agent. )
4. More buyer going to use an attorney to do contract.
5. Buyer charging fee per each showing, contract, consulting..etc...
6.. for those buyer agent who can adjust to the new game rule will survive with more opportunities while more buyer agent forced to n leave the industry.
real estate agents do very little. in fact i advise everyone not to listen to them. their goal is to finish everything fast to get the commission. They do not prepare contracts. they nearly write stuff in a previously prepared contract. they use same template over and over. Most agents should be paid 1000 max.
So you’ve been an agent before?
@@elisabeth_RealEstateAssassin yes. very briefly to undersrand that they follow the same path every time. any issues they go to a broker. and a contract basically the same template prepared by attorneys for the state.
Re. Buyers Agent Agreement........ Since this is a contract I believe it can be cancelled if both parties agree and re-written to match the commission the seller is willing to pay for a buyer agent.
Yes, it is cancelable. Agents must call ahead of showing.
thank you Jackie for sharing these valuable insights. I agree 100%
You're welcome, glad it was helpful!
The buyers agents do MOST of the work. Buyers agents DESERVE more than the listing agents. The listing agents need to keep this in mind or they are going to end up showing their own listing 30 times which means you are now working just as hard as the buyers agent for the same pay.
Listing agents NEED to protect the full commissions just as they always have.
Great buyer's agent EARN their commission in gold. That said, the proposed law will change the way agents do business and I believe listing agents will negotiate their commission with the seller and leave buyer's agent commission open for negotiation when they submit an offer. Listing agents will also need to adapt and may need showing agents on their team to show properties. Listing agents may also negotiate a higher commission if they handle the whole transaction. Every agent has a choice on how to conduct their business and they are able to work with buyers, sellers, or both. I personally negotiated a buyer's commission with hundreds of sellers per year because it was the best thing for my sellers at the time.
look the scenario will be the seller signs a 3% commission, the buyer's agent has a signed 2%, they look at your house. The Offer, the seller picks up the 2% buyer's commission. The listing agent tells you this is the best offer you have had , in the end the seller ends up paying 5%. These folks will train their agents to play good guy bad guy. Sellers must only sign no higher than a 2.5%. This way you have room to deal, since you know all buyers', agents will try to get the Sellers to pay their buyer's commission again.
If a buyer agent tells you in their offer, they have a 2% contract you counter with a spilt pay 1% and this way you pay no more than 3.5%. Otherwise, nothing has changed for the seller?
So you're saying that the listing agent's income should be capped at _____ percent?
@@chrisaldridge6793 Hi Chris if it were me, I would do no higher than 2.5% to assure the sellers have room to negotiate to pick up the buyers' commission to make the deal. Nobody will find out the buyer's contract now till you enter in an offer with the buyer's agent. This could end like the car business many don't understand the game and the sellers concede let's say 2.5% to buyers they end up paying 5% so where was the difference from before the lawsuit? Sellers will only make out if they realize they can't sell at the same commission as a buyer's agent. The buyer's agent will just have to take a little less to make the deal, sellers should never concede more than 2% to a buyer's agent from now on. In the end most sellers will pay about 2.5% maybe 3% to listing agent and concede nothing, or if they must sell up to 4.5% total to close the deal. Sounds confusing but it is not really, again like a car deal the agents will try to confuse the sellers to get more.
what happens with dual agency? So much for NAR Fighting this to the end...I feel there is a much more sinister plan behind all this. Quite targeted..
I feel the same..Govt has something in mind for Real Estate and JB likes to blame everyone else for high cost of RE instead of his failures.
100% agree.
Buyers Agent : I don’t know what’s going on?
Buyer: I don’t either
Seller: Hey! I’ll run the Show !
Listing Agent: Do you need my help?
Seller: I’m not sure… I’m confused
It will be interesting to learn how builders will handle this change in buyers commissions.
Being a non-NAR broker, I do not have to follow NAR rules, except MLS rules do apply.
You didn’t talk about buyers being able to finance commissions. You will likely see banks roll out new plans that allow for higher credit amounts for concessions then they are allowed to now with limits.
What seller in their right mind will let unvetted and unaccompanied buyers go roaming throughout their house.
Sellers will continue to list their homes with realtors and listing properties will actually become much easier.
You've totally bought into the lie. The truth is that my seller will get the absolute best buyer when represented and a commission is given bottom line. Trying to be cheap on the commission will lose you net net bottom line money
So does this mean this is the end of double ending deals now? And not getting 5 or 6 % for a deal if you double ended it becuase buyer agents don’t have to necessarily get paid anymore?
I think it means more double-ending where it is legal to do so. Buyers, will go straight to Listing agent.
I hope the local Realtor Boards and NAR reduce their Board fees since they choose to settle the lawsuit instead of fighting for just compensation on behalf of buyers agents.
I believe this whole lawsuit was to push down commissions. There is already a fair number who think it is saving them and giving an advantage by going direct to sellers agent. Many sellers agents want to double end.
Thank you Jackie.
My pleasure!
My question is what would be the purpose of the MLS when this change comes? Can you share your opinion?
The way I see it, FSBO almost always sell for less, right? How is this any different? When buyers know they will have to pay a commission they will deduct that from their offer or add it as a sellers concessions. I think sellers need to understand they are potentially shut out great buyers. And yes…. Buyers can go to the listing agent, but if the seller isn’t paying for a buyers agent, they are not paying the listing agent either for buyer. The listing agent will do twice the work for half the money.
@@brlyalveright but there’s other ways as well. I watched another video and they were basically stating how because of this new change we would really not need NAR or MLS. Like use Zillow instead that’s what the buyers are going to do if they aren’t using a buyers agent
@@brlyalve if the MLS doesn’t offer compensation for buyers agents people are going to eventually create their own listing marketing tool so they can offer it.
It might be better to get the info from a Real Estate attorney who has actually read the NAR proposed settlement agreement. There are a few here on RUclips.
Great video! agents desperately want to convince themselves that the consumer doesn’t know how to do research on the home they want to buy. There is dual agency in most states and I bet 75% of consumers are going to go that route. The consumer today is not the same as the consumer many years ago. There are many tools to do research on the area that you want to live. No one says that agents shouldn’t get a commission. The problem is do they always deserve the highest commission? That answer would be h*ll no! The fact is, buyers agents are going to have to compete, and that means more times than not for less than what they’re used to. They will either fall in line or drop off.
I think there is at least one good thing to this which is a lot of terrible buyer agents, of which there are many, will go away. Good listing agents won’t have any issues and will likely get more business.
Tell us you’re not in real estate without telling us
The buyers who will go it alone MIGHT cost them way more than paying the professional fee.
Yes because sometimes the sell 80 or 90 thousands dollar less then true value they dont know the Market...
@@laylabono4035Does not make you special, be real. You look at a database. It’s not rocket science. Also the database is going through its own lawsuit for collusion to artificially inflate prices. 95% of homes sold are listed through MLS which is owned by NAR. Perfect recipe for corruption.
This is where it confuses me because doesn’t the buyer pay the money anyway? For example, if the Listing Agent charge 6% and split the other three with the buyers agent, doesn’t the buyer pay that money to the sellers in the beginning to purchase the home and it only comes out at closing to the listing and buyers agent? So, if the listing agent charges 3% and you tell your buyer that they have to pay 3%, they’re still paying 6% either way . I was told in Real Estate school that the price of a home is determined by whatever a buyer is willing to pay so technically there won’t be 6% or any percent if the buyer didn’t pay it to the seller. The buyer has always paid this fee. This is a win for the sellers because if they don’t have to pay a extra 3% from what the buyer gave them originally then they walk away with more money but either way it goes the buyer has always paid their agent commission, regardless, if it transferred to the sellers Hand first or not. The only thing I see different is, how its put down on paper.
It is a win for the seller however the seller pays the commission. A buyer pays the true value in the marketplace regardless of commission. Since the seller negotiates the commission its market value that dictates price regardless of that commission. It's all about exposure to max number of potential buyers and that costs the listing agent to properly advertize.
Bye bye bye mediocre realtors. I’m glad to pay a commission if the realtor is knowledgeable and honest (They exist). This will change the real estate industry and make companies such as Zillow, opendoor, etc. more competitive and stronger. Only time will tell the real impact of this historic settlement.
I honestly see this a one big nothing-burger. Commissions are negotiable, always has been. Brokers taking 1%, flat fee, happens all the time. It has always been up to the brokers' discretion...just like it is now. Brokers lowering their commissions just to make their clients offer more appealing to the seller, happens ALL the time. The only thing that will lower your commission as an agent is if you panic at this news and decide to lower your own commission. That's it.
Penalty to Realtors should be bigger amount of money, they monopolize the listing, and the comssion is extremely high. The Realtors should be demanded for 100 billion dollars. Bye.
Most buyers I meet, do not want to work with the listing agent directly and would rather have a buyers agent that will show them multiple homes with no pressure! This is a real effort to do away with buyer agency, and its sad because its a service people want but now they may have to pay for. At the same time buyers agents will not work for free. There's many high paying hourly jobs out there these days. Maybe buyers agents should go on strike? Listing agents are you ready for that? Listing agents really don't want to mess with buyers anyhow, right? Why would you, because it distracts you from doing the work of getting more listings. When the worker bees die, the Queen bee dies! Think about that for a minute..Listing agents will be begging their sellers to pay the buyers agent a fair compensation that is competitive. They should anyway since that will get more buyers agents and buyers through their door and get them the most for their home. There has to be an incentive for agents to work, and buyers agency needs to exist, or the listing agents will be overworked with no vacation even if you have a team. Have fun with that!😮
What if a buyer's agent is not a member of NAR? Does the requirement of specifying the commission with their buyer still stand?
It doesn't matter if you are a member or not. If you are a real estate agent then yes. This is nation wide real estate law in US.
This will take first time home buyers out of the market. The lower demand will reduce prices and hurt the sellers.
I appreciate your response. I believe listings create demand not agents.
Less buyers will reduce demand. More listings will increase supply. As a result, the prices will go down. It is the supply and demand.@@RealEstateCoach
Great information, thank you!
Glad it was helpful!
Also Jackie so basically just never become a buyer agent cuz it just got worse and just continue to be a listing agent right Jackie ? Listing agents are basically safe from all this non sense ?
I just want to know how much I get to keep?
It sucks Jackie because I literally got 3 buyers wanting to buy in the next 2 months and then this NAR stuff happens smh
How will it effect brand new agents
Brand new agents should master communication skills and work with sellers.
If agents start doing all this crazy stuff it's them missing up the industry. Just keep doing business as usual. It only states don't put the commission in the MLS and people went crazy with smart ideas.
Listing agents will now only negotiate their commission and set expectations on possible buyer commissions if/when they receive a contract from an agent.
@@RealEstateCoach Right, that's why I said this lawsuit has no impact on the industry other than the commission can't be entered in the MLS. Any other changes will come from agents.
we are at the Mercy of buyers ☺ what do you say when few buyers work for more than one agents
Focus on skills and work with sellers!
Absolutely correct. Thanks@@RealEstateCoach
It doesn’t change things much. Commissions negotiated off mls now and sellers can still offer buy side. The negative click bait headlines from media will do more damage than the ruling itself.
Listing agents negotiated commissions upfront for buyers agents. Now buyers need to negotiate their commission from the seller (having less leverage) or have their buyer pay it. How many buyers will pay $5k - $25k for buyer representation?
Correct, but the ruling doesn't get rid of the sellers being able to provide compensation. Just makes it a transparent choice and negotiated between their agents or parties off MLS. NAR: "Offers of compensation could continue to be an option consumers can pursue off-MLS through negotiation and consultation with real estate professionals. And sellers can offer buyer concessions on an MLS (for example-concessions for buyer closing costs)." Most buyers agents will have to negotiate for their clients to get it covered by the sell side in the offer, while also protecting their value in the case the seller won't.
Just being able to get a buyer and open doors to make money wont be as easy as it once was. There will likely be less agents in the field opening opportunity for the pros who can negotiation their value on the buy side and sell side. I don't foresee sellers loosing home sales due to a buy side commission in an offer if its strong and articulated with proper expectations on both sides.@@RealEstateCoach
This is a positive scenario and opportunity for building a strong listing based business. If you work with buyers as I do sometimes, we will just have to negotiate buy side commissions into the offer somehow and negotiate when a seller doesn't automatically offer it. I always told buyers agents its important to get listings as it builds job security. There will be less competition among agents due to this and for those who are positive they will do fantastic. @@RealEstateCoach
Sellers lose when lawsuits arise from unrepresented buyers feel taken advantage of.
Seller agents lose with more time taken to show own listings and work paperwork fir unrepresented buyers. Will end up with fewer listings from the time loss.
Only real winners are the lawyers.
Still, I'm hopeful that seller agents will prep sellers on the value of buyer agents. The rules are changing. Learn the rules so you can go out there and crush it!
Been waiting on your opinion😊
I would say this new rule makes us employees of nar, time for a class action against them from all Realtors.
We need to be proactive ....no matter what...., but I think, Z, R ...they want to end the Realtor industry.
Buyers are going to be paying prices that reflect a price that was based on a property where a seller was compensating the buyers agent.
In theory, the buyer should get the house under a comps price by 2%-3%
several properties and all that time invested (wasted). It will be easier to filter the serious from the non serious buyers. My personal opinion. Thank you Jackie.
Travel agents overcame drastic changes to their industry, nothing to worry about…