NAR settlement is an 'earthquake' for real estate industry
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 май 2024
- In the wake of the National Association of Realtors' (NAR) settlement agreement to pay $418 million over commission practices, ResiClub Co-Founder and CEO Lance Lambert, joins Yahoo Finance Live to discuss the implications for the real estate industry.
Lambert describes the settlement as "an earthquake" for the sector. He explains that in the traditional homebuying process, the seller paid a 6% commission, which was then distributed to the agents involved. However, as a result of this lawsuit, Lambert believes the primary beneficiaries "might be sellers" who could potentially no longer have to pay the buyer's agent commission rate.
Additionally, Lambert points out that this settlement exposes the "deterioration" of housing affordability, which has reached its worst level in the last four decades, forcing individuals into stressful situations. He argues that this stress is creating "public pushback" and highlighting the need for change within the industry.
About Yahoo Finance:
Yahoo Finance provides free stock ticker data, up-to-date news, portfolio management resources, comprehensive market data, advanced tools, and more information to help you manage your financial life.
- Get the latest news and data at finance.yahoo.com
- Download the Yahoo Finance app on Apple (apple.co/3Rten0R) or Android (bit.ly/3t8UnXO)
- Follow Yahoo Finance on social:
X: / yahoofinance
Instagram: yahoofinanc...
TikTok: www.tiktok.com/@yahoofinance?...
Facebook: / yahoofinance
LinkedIn: / yahoo-finance
Affordability is down because of blackrock, state street, and vanguard. But leave it to politicians to ruin the housing market even further
WORST housing affordability in 50 years.
inflation problem due to mass money printing.
the previous people didn't even think about at least vetting businesses before giving trillions out called PPP.😂
And it is about to get a lot worse because this an NAR suit Will make it harder to sell homes and the cheap cash investors will scoop in to buy your home for 1/4 of the price lowering home values. Remember placing your home on MLS to the world will gain more buyers and attractive more fair market value. Investors never pay more than 60% of your homes value to buy your home and they will be the only ones buying homes when this is done ! 1% corporate fascist take over !
REAL ESTATE IS A RACKET! NAR IS CORUPT AND THE ENTIRE INDUSTRY IS FULL OF COLLUSION! Open your eyes people
With respect to Mr. Lambert, he is just factually incorrect. To be clear, sellers NEVER paid the buyer's agent. The seller paid their listing broker, and the broker shared their commission with the cooperating buyer's agents. Also, commissions have always been negotiable with every seller.
Have you ever reviewed an ALTA settlement statement? RE commissions are debited from the seller to the both the listing and buying brokers. Therefor, the seller does indeed pay the buyer commission directly at closing.
Having broker a couple thousand real estate transactions in my career yes, I reviewed my share of Alta statements. Unfortunately, your analysis is incorrect. If you follow the flow of funds, the seller is debited the amount of the commissions, and that amount is then, based on directions from the listing broker, disbursed to both the listing brokerage and the buyers agents brokerage. That said, the listing contract is very clear. The seller pays the listing broker the entire commission. It is misguided/misinformed explanations like you have just provided that have led to the misconception in the public and to these lawsuits, and now this settlement.
The only thing that was “ negotiable” before this ruling was the closing date on the home. The NAR would never willing accept to settle a lawsuit where they did nothing wrong. I’ve purchased and sold a few homes and that 2.5% buyers commission was always sort of the equation because realest agents/brokers said that it was the “standard”. You may call it “ negotiable” but if it’s being enforced and encouraged by majority of the brokers it’s not “ negotiable”.
The your point of sellers never paying. The buyers agent. If I purchased my home for $400k and I sell it a few years later for $400k, that 6% commission is 100% coming out of the funds I paid for the home. It doesn’t matter whether the broker gets the money first or whoever. It’s money that would go directly to me if I wasn’t being forced to pay for that other persons agent. You don’t get to go to a restaurant and demand the person sitting next to you pay for your meal. Now the buyers will have to pay for their own representation
Thank you!!!! This is absolutely correct! I am not sure why attorneys are not seeing this int he listing contracts
100% correct
@@kevinjohnsoncoaching
This guy talks about lack of affordability in housing for buyers, yet, this decision is going to make it more unaffordable for buyers if they have to pay their own agents a commission on top of down payment, closing costs, etc. This is not in the best interests of buyers & affordable housing.
Nope - the cost of the buyer’s agent is bloated and baked into the cost of the house. This will absolutely make homes less expensive for buys even factoring in paying for buyer’s agent
@@jwfriar you really think Sellers will lower the price of homes since they don’t have to pay for buyers commission? No, they will keep the difference 😂
@@jwfriar also, this will absolutely screw veterans since VA loans prohibit paying buyer commission. So they will go in unrepresented - which the sellers agent will absolutely dominate the transaction (hey, they’re hired to look after the sellers interests not buyers).
@@longhornautoplex1905 yes - it’s an efficient market. If they don’t lower with the extra money, a different seller will and it all equalizes out. This is standard supply and demand economics 101 stuff.
It’s the same reason that if a tax on gas was removed, all of the gas stations would lower price by that much bc the market demands it. There are too many seller to tacitly collude to keep prices higher. The true value right now obscured by the unnatural cost incurred by the seller paying the buyer’s agent.
There is a reason why economists are all saying that’s what will happen. They’ve seen proxies for these types of market changes.
@@jwfriar >Nope - the cost of the buyer’s agent is bloated and baked into the cost of the house.
yes, the seller will now be able to set an unfettered market price, and if they do cover buyer's costs after the sale, it can be with an actual negotiation, which NAR claims falsely is natural with the system as it has been.
I have been a broker for 30 years. Was never a member of NAR. Has nothing to do with me. They are blowing this whole thing way out of proportion
In 2024,don't set new year financial goals without consulting a financial adviser.there expertise ensure a solid plan for success.Building wealth involves developing good habits like regular putting money away in intervals for solid investments.
Thanks for the advice! I'm new to financial planning and wasn't sure where to start.Any tips on finding a reliable financial adviser or resource to guide beginners?
You're right, based on personal experience working with an investment advisor, I currently have over $357k in a well-diversified portfolio, that has experienced exponential growth. It is not only about having money to invest in stocks but also you need to be knowledgeable, persistent, and have strong hands to back it up.
@@George-willams How can I participate in this? I sincerely aspire to establish a secure financial future and am eager to participate. Who is the driving force behind your success?
@@ViktoriaTatiana-ls7kkMarie Ann Treloar
She’s the license coach I use.
Funds paid by the buyer were held in escrow. It’s the buyer’s money that gets disbursed at the end of the transaction. Who and why did everybody make this so complicated.
Yes! Without the buyer the seller could not pay a penny.
Precisely ! the buyers money has ALWAYS paid the commissions, without a buyer, you HAVE NO SALE- the BUYERS rule the market NOT the sellers. If I own Apple stock and nobody wants to buy it all I have is a dumb stock. Without a buyer you have no value - this is going to crash the market and you can blame greedy lawyers!
The buyer was paying the whole fee. Without a buyer the seller would not be able to pay a penny.
If the buyer hires an agent they need to pay them. Why would I pay an agent that the buyer hires. Keep in mind the buyers agent is not my friend they are trying to get me down
@@Matthew-nj4do as a seller, you'd want to pay the buyer's agent because they brought you the buyer...without buyer's agents, how do you expect to sell your home for top dollar? Plus, are you, as the seller, now going to discount your asking price by 2-3% because you are not going to pay for a buyer's broker fee? I doubt it. Furthermore, the buyer actually does help pay for their buyer's broker fee because they pay more for the home, so you as a seller can pay both broker fees...which in turn helps the buyer not have to come up with even MORE money upfront to close on the transaction. Sellers don't have to come out of pocket with any funds, buyers do. Sellers were never forced to pay anything...commissions have always been negotiable...you see that plenty with discount brokerages and FSBOs, etc. It was just, in my opinion, the best way to do it to make everything work best for both parties.
Finally someone that gets it!
@@Matthew-nj4do Seller pays list agent -> List agent pays buyers agent. seller never pays anything to a buyers agent
Yeah, let's bring agent commissions down so low you get a minimum wage worker looking after your best interest. Nothing against minimum wage workers but I want some experience and knowledge on this biggest asset in my life. And when I sell, I want it to sell quick with as few people Trompsing through my home as possible. And I want these people escorted with their agent to protect my home. You get what you pay for.
The buyer pays the ultimate commission cause they pay for the entire transaction when they buy
Buyers always pay market value.
umm, no. The SELLER pays for the commission and stamp tax. The buyer pays for closing costs, the seller can help.
Yeah but who’s the only one that brings money to the table? The seller only takes money out from profits once said money is received from buyer he never actually pays anything until it’s received .
@@mplscarsales6652 it’s amazing how many people don’t understand this
We're forgetting in this narrative the seller brings the property to the table. the buyer and seller exchange money for a house. The seller receives the money only once the legal ownership transfers to the buyer. At that point it is the buyer's house and the seller's money. The buyer normally pays fair market value for a house backed up by an appraisal and ALL the commission typically comes out of what the seller receives from the proceeds of the sale only after closing. In this usual scenario there are no commission costs charged to the buyer and to say that it's baked into the price would have to assume that the appraisers are in on the accusations of wrongdoing too. Have yet to see any appraisers being named in these lawsuits.
The future buyers are the ones who lost here. You'll now be paying everything you used to pay plus your agent's commission. And obviously, the ones who won are the lawyers. They don't care that it has become much harder for the general public to buy a home. As long as they make their money. Smh
Notice all the real estate agents chimming in telling everyone how terrible this is going to be. The gig is up. The words were "colluding and racketerring." Remember those words used by the judge.
@@garrydye2394 It is work to bring a buyer to a seller. It is work to put yourself in the right position to get that deal handled. That is why the selling agent pays us the commission to bring that buyer to them.
The problem is not commissions. The problem is the federal reserve printing trillions out of thin air on a computer screen. Welcome to Weimar.
Just like I can view a house on a computer screen, I don’t need a lazy agent to use a Computer Screen
@@suntzu94that is an extremely ignorant take. Can you spot a seller's concession? Do you even know what one is?
Do you know fair housing rights
Do you know the disclosures that sellers are supposed to make?
Do you know all the steps in buying or selling a home?
If you do, maybe you don't need an agent but there are plenty of buyers out there that are inexperienced and can easily be taken advantage of by sellers, listing but there are plenty of buyers out there that are inexperienced and can easily be taken advantage of.
Good agents are far from lazy.
Lmao, your little scam industry is going, waaaa waaaaa
@@thegreatone11 actually no. I'm glad. It will get rid of those that know nothing and give good agents a bad rep.
@@thegreatone11No, because the smart and well off people will always pay for their own representation. Their time is better spent on other things. Kind of like why some people have housekeepers and gardeners and some clean and cut their own grass. The divide between the haves & have nots is about to widen further. Hope you're in the former group & not the later.
Only helps companies like Blackrock. Special interest making a country of renters. First time home buyers will have the worst and biggest impact. I also wonder if this will soon be a fair housing issue? Seems like discrimination is very likely.
NAR failed it is what it is. The lazy buyer agents will deplete and the hard working agents will win in the end. Thank KW & Re/Max for not fighting, which, they had no leg to stand on anyways when they teach you to be a greedy agent in MO saying "You will not be listed on the MLS if you don't accept the 6% commission agreement, That's not negotiatable" - Plaintiffs ... But hey! give the cockroach lawyers a standing ovation to charge their 40% commission on that $1.7 Billion settlement... Which is not negotiatable, right? The real winners are the Lawyers not the 500,000+ seller plaintiffs... they most likey received a letter in the mail from the scumbag lawyers to fill out and sign the lawsuit, to make pennies on the dollar, and have no clue whats going on in first place... So when will the agents go after NAR for the reimbursement of all the fees they paid, since they failed their REALTOR®
Bingo Bango‼️ You are spot on!!!
People thought buying a house was expensive before, haha. Now buyers will be paying upfront for representation, or go unrepresented. Most of these buyers thought they were paying before, it just got worse lmao.
Not sure where you get your info from. Making someone pay a set commission is 100% Illegal. I work at Re/Max and nowhere did they ever tell agents you will push for a set commission.
@@stealthmanx2 Welcome to the show... That's why Re/Max and KW got sued and lost in Oct... You should probably rethink the brokerage you work with since they failed to protect the agents that work for them.
100%. But these are real estate agents all crying tears in this comment section@@stealthmanx2
There is no way I am paying a buyer’s agent 3% in an already ridiculously overpriced market.
Investors don't pay buyer agents. You shouldn't either.
A lot of sellers/buyers don't know this, but all you need is an attorney and/or title company to coordinate the sale. The realtor only opens doors and answers questions. They don't negotiate the transaction because ultimately they ask the sellers on what action to take. If you find a title company that will run the title search and coordinate the sale, along with your attorney, you'll save thousands.
@@paranoidhumanoidwrong
@@paranoidhumanoid attorney will charge you a base price, plus hourly. They won't be there for you to call at 9pm at night when you are stressing out about your loan, or anything that happen during the transaction. They won't be there going over the inspection reports with you. Realtor negotiate in the best interest of their client. We do a lot more than just open doors and answer questions. 1 small mistake on the contract can take you to court. You do the contract yourself, but if you're not aware of contingencies, you may lose your deposit and the house. There's a lot that going on during a transaction. You've must of never had a great realtor that works in your interests.
@@paranoidhumanoid you may barely pass for being savvy, many people trust realtor enough to handle aspects of buying a home, not just opening doors. but hey its youtube comments, what else would one expect.
BOTTOM LINE. Sellers should negotiate ANY commission to sellers agent BUT should HAVE NEVER bound the buyers with those enormous fees! Many buyers DON'T need or WANT ANY agent! Contrary to what NAR and many agents believe, buyers are savvy enough to research listings, get inspections and arrange financing. And yes, a buyer can even compose questions to a seller or sellers agent. The real estate industry has been a RIGGED SCAM for decades. No other country in the WORLD punishes buyers and sellers with 5, 6 or 7 percent fees. Usually one or 2 percent.
6% is a lot. Imagine you sell a 500k home would need to pay 30k just for realtor commission.
Indeed, 6% seems high, but consider 10%-15% that gets lost with Novice negotiation skills. Negotiation doesn't end when an offer is accepted...... This is the greatest that could ever happen to our industry now the public will see our value..... Remember this post... 😉
Negotiations are ultimately decided upon by the seller, not realtors. They are and always will be middlemen. They do nothing to justify a 6% or even 3% commish. Smart sellers hire attorneys or simply have title companies coordinate the sale with no realtor involvement and it saves sellers tens of thousands of dollars that could be used for reno or savings. @@stewartdaniels9634
let em know@@stewartdaniels9634 also home sales will take twice as long, listing agents believe it or not are lazier than buyer agents. Electric cars were also a big flop. This administration is garbage.
The greatest what?
Another problem. 6% is not a standard commission, and what people need to know is that they can negotiate commissions with agents. I have never earned 6%, I never asked for 6%, the most that I've ever gotten what's 2% and if I acted as a dual agent, 4%.
The notion that 6% is a standard commission is completely ridiculous.
Also, it's illegal to say that 6% or any percentage is a standard commission. That's called price-fixing and an antitrust violation.
6% transaction fee, just think about it... Visa aren't charging that much.
I think a lot of buyer's, especially on the lower end will be left out of the market due to this.
I keep seeing this take. Can you explain why you’ll think this happens. Genuinely curious.
Seller should be responsible for seller agent and buyer pay buyer agent . For example, 2 percent to seller agent, 1 percent to buyer agent. End of story
Open to discussion. Is the seller really paying the commission of their agent and the buyers agent? Isn’t the buyer really the one paying both?
100% correct. Plus the interest given most use loans on the commission over 30 years 🙃
The seller is and was always paying the listing agent only. Then the listing agent offered a sum of that commission to whoever procured a buyer. That could be any amount. You routinely here 6% but I've never gotten more than 4% and I was acting as a dual agent representing both parties when that occured.
Sellers can and always have been able to negotiate the compensation/commission with their agent. There was never a "standard" commission.
Agents assist sellers and buyers and those that are not familiar with the process of selling or buying real estate can really benefit by having one represent them.
Look I'll be honest. Some sales/purchases are a walk in the park. Others can get on the brink of collapse and be a rollercoaster of problems. My job is to get it to the closing table and get the most for my seller and the least for my buyer. Unfortunately in this market the latter is more challenging because much of the public just goes all in and buyers routinely are getting outbid. It's tough for them.
Sometimes a buyers agent will show someone 20-50 homes before they buy and when they finally do and they break down the commission that was earned, it could very well equate to minimum wage. Even worse, if that buyer doesn't have a Buyer Representation Agreement that buyer could very well bounce and those 50 homes you showed them, all the gas, time and time away from family or a part time job was all for $0. People don't think about that.
It is so speculative. In the near future, agents will be more protected because they will be required to have a Buyer Representation Agreement, but, unfortunately unfortunately, many buyers will decide to go at it on their own and they will be taken advantage of and possibly not get the deal they could or not know exactly what they are getting if they don't have representation.
I'm sure a bunch of people will chime in and say, "agents just open doors", "they're useless", " they get paid too much", and that's fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion. I know what I provide to my clients and EVERYONE of them has been greatful for the services I provided.
Let's see, my last seller I got +40k for them. They said they would sell their house at X and I sold it at X+40k. That more than made up for my commission and put +30k in their pockets. My last buyers, the house was listed at X and I said it's WAY overpriced and it is not going to sell... We waited and it sat then when it got close to what I projected it to sell for, I told them to offer the number I was thinking and they got the house, -80k under the most recent list and -140k under original list.
So yeah, I think I earned my ridiculous commission 🙂
One question , the total USA residential real estate market is 47 trillion and the total stock market is 50 trillion which one would you take ? I’m going with the thousands of companies because for them to be on par one has to be overvalued or undervalued.
This is ridiculous. If you lower the amount of comission that the seller has to pay, they will just ask more for the property. If the buyer has to compensate their agent, they will offer less for the property than they otherwise would have. In other words, prices will be the same.
Exactly my thoughts. If I were a buyer paying for buyer's commissions, I definitely would put a lower offer or even a below asking price. I am pretty sure that's what most buyers would do down the road anyway.
Sellers will also raise the price and include “I will pay your buyers agent fee”. The prices could be even more then it was before this lawsuit.
The point is that buyers agents are no longer needed. They were only needed before because NAR practically forced the market to use them.
Every buyers agent will leave real estate or become listing agent only, there will be no more buyers agents therefore listing agent will have to show every listing they have two every buyer and they will vet every buyer more stringently it will be very hard to get into the homes-- sellers will get mad about this and listing agents will have to do five times the amount of work and they will charge way more than 3% for their side this could actually raise commissions for sellers! Keep in mind very very few buyers will pay an extra amount of money to have their own agent when they can bypass that agent and go straight to the listing agent and pay nothing because the listing agent is the only one charging commission therefore they will do extra work for both sides I hope you like higher commissions and a convoluted market! good luck folks!
You're missing the point. The issue at hand is how NAR has acted as a defacto monopoly, or mafia, and tacitly established the rules of the game. And it's a game in which the buyer's agent and sellers are actually colluding instead of competing with each other because the buyer's agent gets a cut regardless. It has all the trappings of (commission) price fixing and subject to antitrust regulations. NAR reminds me of a gangster inspired organization.
Sellers agents and buyers agents should not be a ‘requirement.’ Buyers and sellers should have a choice whether or not to use them and if they do, the buyer should pay their and the seller should pay their agent. I’ve bought and sold 3 homes. I didn’t have a sellers agent after the 1st sale, but I was forced to pay the buyers agent. This will force buyers and sellers to have more freedom and choice to get more educated, or pay their respective agent if the choose not to.
The seller always paid the buyer. I had to pay and was never told it was negotiable.
The 6 % commission was in place many yrs ago when the nation’s average home price was below 100 k.
Since the 80s the average home price is steadily going up and in many cases home prices are in the millions, I don’t think it is correct that a person should pay
60 k commission on a million dollar home when a home valued at 300 k requires the same amount of work . No one deserves to make 60 k on a million dollar home when today in many cases the home gets sold before goes in the multiple listing.
All true, just negotiate using that logic and you will easily get down to 4%.... the free market is there, people are just too dumb to use it.
Home prices aren’t going up. Dollar value is going down.
Not true at all. I'm in one of the hottest markets, SO-Cal and average days on market is 60+. It's like selling a shirt at walmart v. Louis Vuitton, of course the more expensive shirt is going to cost more, a lot goes into it, quality, highest level design, etc. average agents are not consistently taking million dollar listings, it's the most skilled agents that are working at that level.
hourly pay and salaries also went up along with the amount of work needed to sell a home. When homes were 100K, the % was still the same compared to the salaries back then. Not sure I get what you are saying?
The truth of this matter is: Buyers have been contacting listing agents to buy more often than not for time in memorial. Listing agents usually must disclose their fiduciary relationship with the seller (their client first and foremost), and proceed to collect all of the commission.
So to get more buyers in the market (fewer buyers than ever qualify for a home right now) we're going to make buyers pay the commission for their agent? Opposite effect is more likely. Fewer buyers. And explain again to me how sellers benefit from fewer buyers able to afford the down payment, which may include buyer's agent commission now.
Nope. What this lawsuit is trying to uncover is the lie agents have been telling buyers forever...that seller's pay their commission. That's never been true in the history of the world. If you've ever sold a house you know you never put money into escrow. We can spin reality and say "Well, yeah but if a buyer offers $500k that's MY money. No, it isn't. That's the scam. The buyer has to put all $500k into escrow. Out of their pocket and into escrow. At close escrow sends $15k to the buyer's agent. Who paid that agent? Seller? That makes no sense.
The only reason agents can get away with this fraud is the collusion with the listing agent who gets the seller to agree to "pay" the listing agent 6% of which they will give 3% to the buyer agent. In legalize the listing agent represents the seller so they can get away with telling buyers the seller pays. Of course the buyer loves that they get driven around by a friendly person for FREE!!! But the money comes out of their pocket. They also pay the listing agent's commission and all closing costs because they are the only person putting money in.
Investors know this scam. The try to get to owners before they list because they can offer 6% more to the seller, and get that 6% back at close because they can be their own agent. Seller gets the same amount whether 6% goes to the investor or agents.
If this lawsuit wakes buyers up they will be suddenly able to do the same as investors and offer 6% more to seller without it costing them a penny. Or values could drop 6% without sellers losing a penny. If an agent is forced to tell buyers the truth that they're on the hook for $15,000 a lot of buyers are going to balk and just look on Zillow, Redfin, MLS themselves and contact the owner or listing agent directly for a showing. That's also going to put the 3% listing commission more up for grabs too between seller and buyer.
Well Bidens DOJ put thier 2 cents in on this one. Good luck getting an answer from them assuming they are even qualified in residential real estate transactions.
BOTTOM LINE. Sellers should negotiate ANY commission to sellers agent BUT should HAVE NEVER bound the buyers with those enormous fees! Many buyers DON'T need or WANT ANY agent! Contrary to what NAR and many agents believe, buyers are savvy enough to research listings, get inspections and arrange financing. And yes, a buyer can even compose questions to a seller or sellers agent. The real estate industry has been a RIGGED SCAM for decades. No other country in the WORLD punishes buyers and sellers with 5, 6 or 7 percent fees. Usually one or 2 percent.
@@clearviewtechnical it’s so funny that people talk about what the world does. Yeah, they wouldn’t dare move to the world over a percentage of a commission of a sale of a house like please. Everything is cheaper another parts of the world because there’s no rights in other parts of the world so you could take that junk back to the trash
So for regular people who barely have any money to their name, they either have to use the sellers agent who is also working for the listingagent or use a discount agent.
No, this means as a buyer you shouldn’t use an agent at all lol. They’re absolutely useless. I don’t need a bottle girl to tell me what’s I already researched on Zillow so she can get paid $15k. Seller agents sure, but buyer agents? give me a break. Triggered realtors incoming
wow. That's so incorrect. A buyer is much bettor of with representation. I am NOT useless as a seller agent or a buyer agent. I have job to do, based on which side I represent. If someone has a buyer agent that is useless, then they have/had the wrong agent.
@@KompressorV12
In NJ the commission is always negotiable. You want to sell it for 3% go ahead. There were 3% and less companies in the mid 2000’s. They went out of business quick because agents weren’t making money, the agents s$cked and houses weren’t selling. You want to attract good buyers, buyers that have been pre-approved, & can close. If you are too cheap & don’t want to pay an attractive commission for that then have fun dealing with those psycho window shoppers knocking on your door during dinner time 7 days a week.
Not wanting to pay someone $25,000 for a few hours worth of work is being "cheap"?
In that case it’s approx $12k to the buyer, $12k to the seller. If you feel paying $25k to someone who just helped you pocket a half million dollars is too much then yes you are probably cheap. Just sell my house and I’ll pay up.
Canadian here... Our real estate market is basically the same as the US market. Seller pays the commission to both listing agent an purchaser agent.
Why was it ever structured that the sellers pay the whole fee is a very good question!)
Not easy to answer and I do not think Mr. Lambert's answer (historically speaking .....) is near completly correct. But that's okay.... What is done is done.
What happens next is important... And what ever you folks decide down south, will likely happen here up north...
This is potentially a major shakeup!!!!
Because the buyer money is what pays everybody's commissions. The buyers money has always been used to pay all of the commissions, without the buyers loan there is no sale or commissions at all the buyer has always been in charge and the buyers agent should always be paid. This force listing agents to work harder since all the buyer agent will leave the market and they will end up charging more than 6% for their side alone commissions could potentially go up for sellers this is a disastrous train wreck ! Just lawyers price fixing their hourly fee is to get paid .
It was really the buyer that would end up paying this without even knowing it, more often than not the selling price kind of accommodated that said 5% or 6% commission…?
Realtors don't want to take any responsibility for housing problems. Their not 100% responsible but they are a big percentage. They will not change their business model without being forced too. High prices, fees are gone now but they are more changes coming. I need to pay you $30,000 to sell my house? Hell no. That's 80% of my yearly income, no. With technology today one Agent's is all that is needed. Change the contracts, never talk to a appraisal company to get the numbers higher and we have a more transparent transactions.
I do not understand why anyone would go into the RE business when unlike before, there will be no commission paid to the agency or broker who represents the buyer. IMO, the seller simply will not negotiate anything with a buyer's agency - simply because the buyer can go to the listing agent and make the same offer.
Before the court ruling a 5% commission (or whatever was negotiated between the seller and the listing agency/agent) was split between the listing agency and the agency/broker that represented the buyer of the house.
If an agency or broker made 50% of their income from listing houses and 50% from selling not their own listings, then after July 2024 they will be missing 50% of their income or more because sellers will never negotiate with a buyer's agent/agency and if they are smart will negotiate the 2.5% listing commission down to 1.5-2.0% leaving even less money for the RE agency and broker.
The huge lie here or sorry omission is realtors touting that “commissions have always been negotiable” insinuating a premise that informing buyers, particularly first time buyers of this is part of the vebal routine with “most” agents, it’s not! Yes, it’s written in the contracts but these novice and often not so novice buyers and seller do not know and did not know they could offer less than 6%. It’s in their interest to have the 6% baked into the system. Why would agents upset this system when it obviously works to their benefit. 6% of a $500,000 sale is $30,000, 30k, but I paid that on my last sale. Never again!
It’s a racket…
Sell for sale by owner then. What's the problem??
About time!! Finally justice.
Justice for what?
How does Michael Ketchmark receive 40% of $418 million? Who's price fixing NAR or the attorneys who filed the lawsuit? Exactly. Tell me where the 40% figure came up. Hello.
Never have any of the agents I used been helpful to me in my purchase. They were just there but not needed. I only hired them because that’s what I thought you have to do.
You hired them because you don't know what you're doing and you need an agent to complete the process for you. You hired them and paid nothing for their services.
Please tell us how to buy a house, step by step since they weren't needed. Educate the rest of us fools.
Can the buyers and sellers agents just start billing by the hour or would that cost more than 3% for the buyer and seller agent who would probably end up costing someone more than 3% for each party or 6% wouldn't it, 🤔
No they will notice because they're used to making more money. People are not going to work harder for less money they will leave the industry and you will have no agents at all.
Earthquake? Really? Every headline I've seen on this topic is inflammatory and/or hyperbole. Commissions are not going away. There is no earthquake. Anyone who works in real estate understands the true magnitude of this change, and it's not earthquake level. Real Estate is an industry that's constantly changing, and this change is going to make us even better (for the most part). It's the low- and middle-income consumers I'm most concerned about. If they feel they need an agent, but cannot afford to pay their agent, and if the seller refuses to do, home ownership just got harder for them. They are the ones being hurt the most. And VA loans forbid buyers from paying their agents at all.
Thanks for your opinion.
Sellers are asked to pay listing brokers to share with their buying brokers because buyers are already paying their cost to close the transaction, their cost of the loan, their down payment,etc…. Sellers, who are expected to get proceeds from the sale can easily adapt to the cost compared to the buyers.
Mr LAMBERT should not just say “that sucks’….
i think it might hurt buyer as well as sellers. buyers pay more fees. buyer agents are no willing to show houses for flat or lower commission. sellers might find hard time to sell house. hopefully, it will bring more houses to the market. News agent might not be able to survive or quit jobs.😅
Unfortunately thinking like this is part of the problem because all your focusing on is commissions and what scrupulous agents might do, or not do, because of it
You're focusing on agents that only care about commissions.
Yes, agents have to get paid but good agents care about their clients and look out for their best interests, advocate for them and protect them.
@@the_stixXx no pay no gain. incentive, incentive, incentive. buyer will pay more to purchase home ( down payment, closing cost, improvements cost, plus additional flat fee or 3%-1% commissions fees). in my opinion, it is lose lose position. buyer who choose a good agent will pay more in the future. seller might be difficult to show home to more prospective buyers. nobody can exactly predict future, but it might slow down real estate market.
Not really I'm a RE part-time agent. Most of us would just get a side hustle 😂 but it does suck that I now just started getting serious in the industry and then this happened. 🤦🏾♂️
@@ishma2100 if you enjoy the profession and have good intentions and provide excellent service, yes it might be more difficult to build a client base, but you will do fine.
If you hopped in to capitalize on a hot industry, probably not.
@@mingchen8323 markets are very location dependent. For instance, you can't compare, NY to Arkansas or Maine, or the Carolinas.
For decades the house realtors were taught that commission is negotiable. But in reality and due to that pot so called MLS you sell any house in that pot and will get paid 50% of what the listing broker negotiated at 5% to 6% and all gets 'even'. The commission of 5% to 6% actually 'not negotiable' by sellers due to that tactic. As a retired commercial real estate expert, the commission is really negotiable not the 5% or 6% if the price is as the price usually in the multi millions. Majority of commercial brokers also do not join that pot called MLS and do not share any commission with selling broker of commercial real estate deals!
Commission is 100% negotiable. Sometimes I get seven or 8% if a listing is going to be tough. If a seller wants three, they can go FSBO it.
Just because I can walk away doesn’t mean a fee isn’t negotiable. Anything less than 6% is not worth the agents time.
Sellers that try to cheap out on commission take years off your life and it’s best to just tell them to kick rocks. You’ll be happier and there are plenty of other sellers that see the value.
Regarding question “Why are you on this show defending the system” - because it benefits himself personally, and to “heck” with his customers
The 6% commission hasn't been around for a long time now. Some companies won't charge a percentage at all, it's just a fixed price regardless if you buy or sell. With the advent of internet companies like Redfin, 1% for those companies is normal. The headlines are all talking about the commission percentage, but there was no law or rule that set that, so there is nothing the ruling can change with that. What WILL change is now buyers will pay their agent out of their closing costs, and sellers won't pay buy agents out of their closing costs....which seems reasonable but buyers already are struggling to find any money down, so now they will just need more. Also, the ruling is going to break open MLS, which was previously restricted to the National Association of Realtors.
I list for a total of 3% NOT 5 of 6 and have been for the past two years. I provide full service too. Its ridiculous to pay agents 5 or 6% my company is 3% Realty Prime
With the internet I don't see why a real estate agent is needed.
Our real estate agent was able to provide insight like "this home looks good but there has been a lot of foundational damage in many houses in this area"
As a broker, I can see how the listing agents role has been canalized by the Internet, but I don't actually see how this can be done without a buyers agent, someone who is licensed and recognized by the state who can open and unlock people's homes and bring prospective buyers in to see the homes.
If something goes wrong, there is a record of who specifically was in that home, every time I open a lock box my info is logged, I'm finger printed by the state, ect. Without me, there's no point of accountability as to who is coming in and out of your home, and there's no regulation power for the state to enforce fair housing laws too btw. A seller might decide "not selling to (this race) people", and won't allow them in to view the home. I know that's not the norm, and an extreme example, but without an agent, there's no chain of accountability for something like that.
Can the internet walk you through a house and point out deficiencies you may not notice? Can it negotiate repairs after the home inspection? Can it help problem solve when the buyer's loan goes sideways and threatens the transaction? Can it advise sellers of the strengths and weaknesses of each offer received? Please enlighten me.
@@kmuhsify any person can do this. Real estate agents are not needed.
@@JB-st1oifor the record, how many sales have you personally completed in your lifetime.
Flat fee MLS listing to include recent market comparison. If needed. Paid up front by seller.
Show your own house. If you can't answer potential buyer questions, or understand what offer ammount you should accept or reject... then you need to go the 6% commision route. And pay the man
Intermediary without appointments. A good one will have a realestate transaction coordinator.
Flat fee split between seller and buyer 20/80. But Extremely negotiable
Buyers need to pay for their own agent!!! Period!! They must pay for the level of assistance they need.
Thank you... FINALLY, someone else is saying what I've been preaching... It is absolutely unsustainable to price homes above what people can ACTUALLY and PRACTICALLY afford. Incomes have not increased to keep up with housing.... the housing market should never had risen to what is now, there was absolutely NO reason to do so other than deception and greed.
It's not Real Estate Agent's fault that the home prices are high it's supply and demand ethics. When money is 3% to borrow everyone wants to buy a home blame the lenders?- Home Seller sets the price not the real estate agent. You don't know how many times I suggest a price and the seller wants to go $50,000 above it and will not list with me unless I do it. Real estate agents have to abide by what their customer wants them to do it is not the real estate agents fault because of the prices. When interest rates of 3% then buyers can afford a higher monthly payment there for the seller race is the price of the home to make up for it out of greed and to get as much as they can ! agents are NOT the problem!
I have a strange feeling that "charming diamond in the rough" phrases used by agents ain't gonna cut the mustard anymore on transactions. Might have to start rolling up the sleeves moving forward...
So when you say that housing affordability is the worst since the early 1980’s when rates were at 18%.. That was only the case for a brief period of time.. Housing affordability now is the worst it has ever been broadly speaking
As a real estate trainer and a real estate agent with 25 years of experience, I am surprised, that NAR didn't use the following defense:
"the 6% commission readily shared by the listing agents with agents who bring buyers is a great tool to create much higher exposure of the properties and, thus, selling the properties for much higher prices. Thus, sharing the 6% commission benefits our clients who are the sellers". By not using this point NAR has let its members down.
I feel like NAR did let us members down here. I'm also curious if just conceding like this is part of the game plan though. It Just seems like the NAR wimped out here
Not to mention the bigger obvious thing here, sellers clearly read the contract which indicates what that particular brokerage charges to list your home. If you don't like the price hire someone cheaper it's a free society capitalism. Who is forcing them to sign this? This lawsuit is baseless needs to be appealed and on top of that, all real estate agents in the United States need to counter sue for billions of dollars for frivolous lawsuits destroying their industry ! Can I now sue a car dealership because they forced me to sign a contract to buy a car that I could've gotten cheaper elsewhere? This is gonna get nuts !
I think there’s a good chance that this could have been overturned but they settled. Reality however is most if not all first time buyers and I’d bet most sellers wouldn’t know that commissions are negotiable as common knowledge. If you want to say “well, it’s right there in the contract for them to read” sounds grifty and dishonest 🤷♂️
REAL ESTATE IS A RACKET! NAR IS CORUPT AND THE ENTIRE INDUSTRY IS FULL OF COLLUSION! Open your eyes people
They attempted to. The judge set a stringent "per se" standard for admitting evidence, essentially sidelining any arguments regarding the consumer benefits provided by Realtors. On the bright side, we discovered that the Plaintiffs’ counsel funneled money into the judge's spouse’s city council election coffers DURING adjudication. An act that must vacate the verdicts and settlements.
Criminal referrals are filed with the US Atty and Special Agent In Charge, FBI Kansas City.
Why can't we do this with medical bills?
😂 cause politicians make too much off healthcare and pharma.
The smart and capable realtors should come up with a fee based model and offer either buying or selling services not based on commissions. This was what happened to the financial advisor industry to the benefit of consumers. Commissions model is fraught with hidden cost to the consumers. That’s what the lawsuit is all about.
It’s unbelievable to me that people do not understand that the entire fee goes to the listing broker. The listing broker negotiates a fee with the seller. it is then the choice of the listing broker to share or offer a portion of that commission to any cooperating broker.
If I found the buyer and seller, I would take the entire 6%, im not just taking 3%.
The seller has never ever ever ever paid for the buyers agent. The listing agent pays the buyers agent.
BOTTOM LINE. Sellers should negotiate ANY commission to sellers agent BUT should HAVE NEVER bound the buyers with those enormous fees! Many buyers DON'T need or WANT ANY agent! Contrary to what NAR and many agents believe, buyers are savvy enough to research listings, get inspections and arrange financing. And yes, a buyer can even compose questions to a seller or sellers agent. The real estate industry has been a RIGGED SCAM for decades. No other country in the WORLD punishes buyers and sellers with 5, 6 or 7 percent fees. Usually one or 2 percent.
Down the road commissions on both sides will be eliminated and their will be flat fees(hourly) if a buyer/seller choose to have agents involved in the transaction!
This is great and lets the seller and buyer directly negotiate a fixed rate or even a fixed amount like how we tip based on any service. There are no limits maybe a generous seller would tip more than 6%. Why the brokers are unhappy is over this I cant understand.
Well, it's already not fixed at 6% it can be more and it can be less. The media is not explaining this very well to people at all.
@@easylivingaustin512 I know in my state it was negotiable between 1 and 6%, but it was more dictated than negotiable, so the buyer and seller had little negotiating power, this now emphasis more on the tips that match the service, is all I 'm saying.
@@easylivingaustin512are you surprised the media is getting it wrong? I used to think journalist were intelligent. I’m not sure why I thought that.
Try buying google add time to place your home all over the world and show the hundreds of thousands of people to get the highest bidder and Buyer and see how much it cost you you're gonna be happy to pay the 6% in the end lol ..... Keep in mind if you don't hire an agent you're still going to hire an attorney they're not gonna show up to inspections appraisals or take your call from your buyers 15 times a day they're going to charge for every bit of that and you're gonna probably end up paying 5000 for that minimum. Attorneys are good at interpreting contracts they are not real estate agents they don't get in the car show homes and show up for the things needed to sell the home .
It's funny that the laws on compensation have always been against price fixing, and now, all of a sudden, we are talking about price fixing. 😂
Do agents really need to become members of NAR?
Depends on if your association requires it.
People knew to the market I just wanna assure you for the last 60 years I’ve been negotiating commissions down to 3% and also down to 2%. This is not a new idea but what’s good about it is it’s gonna wake up a lot of people more negotiating won’t hurt anything, but sometimes it can kill dados. yeah but you know it’s still comes down to the bottom line and most people will just sit sit there and say I don’t care how you gotta do it. This is where I’ll go and that’s it. Maybe you haven’t heard that expression yet but eventually you will.
This sounds more like saving the richer people money. Why would a broker/agent not set their price around the average home price in a covered area and then if you bought a cheaper house you payed more but if you buy a more than average home you save on the fees. To take it further if this passes and feds stay high on rates and the average for a home after agent fees are set goes down in a year or two the regular people pay even more than what 3% would have been and the rich still save on their homes. Just my opinion
Because you dips you split the commission 4 Ways not 2. You have to pay YOUR BROKERS as well!
Thats the real story here. I think it's the brokers that are the problem. They get paid for doing nothing, not the agent. The Broker model is going to crumble soon. I think Real Estate certification needs to be at least one year in community college and cost at least 10K to get. The problem is, there are too many agents because it costs 500$ to get a license. Too many unexperienced idiots making agents who are good look bad. Additionally you should only be required to work under a broker for the first 5 years, then you could be your own agent with no need and pay the E&O insurance to the state broker who controlled the entire state's agents. No more need for millions of knuckledragger brokers who don't do squat...
Next up property values drop. Sellers take 3% less. Circle or life continues.
Prediction - prices will not go down...not enough inventory - first time buyers who are having the hardest time will not be able to pay out of pocket...they will feel it the worst - sure you say - go to the listing directly - that's a joke - as a listing agent - the work fo the seller- the strongest offers most of cash down will win....first time buyers lose again!
Correct. Pricing is a function of supply and demand.
Yup! The experienced and well-off will not have an issue with this, it's the first-time and middle class buyers who will suffer.
BOTTOM LINE. Sellers should negotiate ANY commission to sellers agent BUT should HAVE NEVER bound the buyers with those enormous fees! Many buyers DON'T need or WANT ANY agent! Contrary to what NAR and many agents believe, buyers are savvy enough to research listings, get inspections and arrange financing. And yes, a buyer can even compose questions to a seller or sellers agent. The real estate industry has been a RIGGED SCAM for decades. No other country in the WORLD punishes buyers and sellers with 5, 6 or 7 percent fees. Usually one or 2 percent.
Hahaha, lets hope the rest of the scamming, like groceries, store scams, stops. Im sure you scamers won't agree.
Well that mean real estate agent really have to work for their money. They need to work for the client to make sure the house is sold.
Sold and buy. Paying this commission will come back to being the best thing. I think realtors will change something the public will regret going to. People will come back begging for those 6% split rates sooner than you think.
This will incentivize more sellers. Realtors are almost useless. Good riddance
This is GREAT news. Real estate agents are useless. I cant for the life of me figure out what they bring to the table. RE agents are middle men who take a few pics, answer some calls/emails and collect huge commission checks and I hope this ruling causes a dramatic overhaul
💯
hardly but you do you
I understand this business and have worked in it for over 20 years. I'm learning everyday, but this guest is SPOT SPOT on. Lance knows his stuff!
Not. Even. Close.
“I will sell this house today” 🏡
Ouch. First time buyers brace yourselves.
The buyer is presently completely unrepresented!
BOTTOM LINE. Sellers should negotiate ANY commission to sellers agent BUT should HAVE NEVER bound the buyers with those enormous fees! Many buyers DON'T need or WANT ANY agent! Contrary to what NAR and many agents believe, buyers are savvy enough to research listings, get inspections and arrange financing. And yes, a buyer can even compose questions to a seller or sellers agent. The real estate industry has been a RIGGED SCAM for decades. No other country in the WORLD punishes buyers and sellers with 5, 6 or 7 percent fees. Usually one or 2 percent.
6% is not real.... real estate commission for most markets is much less.
And I negotiated min down to 4.5%.
So let me get this straight Lance - "3% goes to the buyer agent and 3% goes to the seller agent, but it varies by market" Huh? Well which one is it? According this lawsuit brokerages colluded and commissions were fixed artificially high, right? So Lance, why would any market deviate from this hypothetical standard?
BOTTOM LINE. Sellers should negotiate ANY commission to sellers agent BUT should HAVE NEVER bound the buyers with those enormous fees! Many buyers DON'T need or WANT ANY agent! Contrary to what NAR and many agents believe, buyers are savvy enough to research listings, get inspections and arrange financing. And yes, a buyer can even compose questions to a seller or sellers agent. The real estate industry has been a RIGGED SCAM for decades. No other country in the WORLD punishes buyers and sellers with 5, 6 or 7 percent fees. Usually one or 2 percent.
AND THERE GOES JOSH'S CAREER
1:15 Lance let me answer this, you sound like you haven't been licensed for 17 years like I have. Sellers DID NOT pay the buyer agent to "pay it forward" just because they were once an up and coming young couple...
Sellers paid the buyer agent to deliver them a ready, willing and able buyer wiling to close on terms the sellers are agreeable to. The alternative, in some instances, is much more expensive. E.I. you've already moved out of your house, and are now paying 2 mortgages for months waiting for the buyer.
Paying for the buyer's broker can give the buyer the confidence to approach the transaction in the first place, knowing their best interests are (hopefully) being looked after.
Paying the buyer broker is no different than the seller paying for the buyer's title insurance, home inspection repairs, closing costs, rate buy-downs etc etc. The sellers do this not out of kindness, but rather from the idea that buyers can and will stretch their buying power further if these costs do not have to come out of their own pocket. Its (hopefully) a win/win at the end of the day.
As someone licensed since 2007 I am ASTOUNDED at the pure ignorance of just about every news report i have seen on this topic. Im sure I'd look just as silly trying to report on some ground-breaking medical breakthrough. I guess thats why i dont do it; I digress.
To see the lack in understand of real estate basics and fundamentals just shows how little people have understood about the market and industry. I guess thats one reason real estate agents have survived so long after stock brokers and travel agents etc.
My 2 cents is that regardless of the merit of the lawsuit, this agreed settlement is ludicrously toothless in addressing the "problem". Its unconscionable to me that the agreed settlement wasn't a disclosure form that would read:
"I understand as the seller of 123 Main St I am fully aware I am paying the listing agent a commission and I am also buying the buyer agent a separate commission and it is my choice to pay each [or not]" signed: Mr. & Mrs Seller.
The stated objective of bringing buyer agent compensation to the forefront and encouraging negotiations on the amount may be achieved long term. Everything else about lowering home prices etc is ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT. The end.
Rip buyers who are going to just buy a home now with no buyer's agent. You're setting yourself up to getting hosed by the seller and the sellers agent. You may get scammed more often with title deeds, fine print, hidden things because the seller has the sellers agent who is working for the seller versus you the first time home buyer deer in the headlights thinking... i can do this myself, there is nothing to it.
Exactly and wait until buyer start getting screwed over by crooked sellers and their agents and counter sue for billions of dollars because they were forced to buy homes without representation . Keep in mind a buyer is not going to pay extra money to have their own agent they have enough costs, they're going to bypass that agent and go straight to the listing agent and get screwed over .
BOTTOM LINE. Sellers should negotiate ANY commission to sellers agent BUT should HAVE NEVER bound the buyers with those enormous fees! Many buyers DON'T need or WANT ANY agent! Contrary to what NAR and many agents believe, buyers are savvy enough to research listings, get inspections and arrange financing. And yes, a buyer can even compose questions to a seller or sellers agent. The real estate industry has been a RIGGED SCAM for decades. No other country in the WORLD punishes buyers and sellers with 5, 6 or 7 percent fees. Usually one or 2 percent.
So glad this scam is over
It’s not over. Rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic.
If charging commissions is a scam then why do most for sale by owners end up listing with a realtor? Statistically over 80% of them do it. Sellers are about to learn a seriously hard lesson and I'm getting my popcorn LOL......
The scam is being forced to pay the buyers agent commission. Numerous lawsuits have spoken. How many more do you need to see? Anytime money is moved/transacted there are blood suckers skimming off the top. I’m sure travel agents were saying the same thing. No one will travel without us! Well
Great news🎉
Agreed! It’ll totally help when buyers have to coordinate their own showings, write their own contracts, facilitate their own negotiations, etc. 🤡
This is
One opinion sellers will
Not benefit
How about a class action lawsuit against lawyers for taking 40 or 50% when they win a case.
Lawyers do actual work that can take years and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars that they cover with no guarantee of winning. They’re out big if they lose since they take huge financial risk on behalf of their clients who’ve put up no money.
@@ChopperChad actual work huh?
Stop selling your homes to large corporations. Sell to a private family.
Finally! This will weed out all the dead weight and allow the industry to become more professional.
BOTTOM LINE. Sellers should negotiate ANY commission to sellers agent BUT should HAVE NEVER bound the buyers with those enormous fees! Many buyers DON'T need or WANT ANY agent! Contrary to what NAR and many agents believe, buyers are savvy enough to research listings, get inspections and arrange financing. And yes, a buyer can even compose questions to a seller or sellers agent. The real estate industry has been a RIGGED SCAM for decades. No other country in the WORLD punishes buyers and sellers with 5, 6 or 7 percent fees. Usually one or 2 percent.
1:21 👈 that is a crappy explanation!
*The corruption that runs through this administration is getting more scary. I feel for people with disabilities not getting the help they deserved. Anyone who is not investing now is missing a tremendous opportunity. Imagine investing $2000 and receiving $11,300 in 4days.*
How can we generate more revenue during quantitative times? I can't afford to see my savings crumble to dust.
Getting Yetta Cox to help me really helped me clear all my debts. I started with what I have left and it's been the best decision I ever made.
You're right! The very first time I tried, I invested $1000 and after a week, I received $5,500. That really helped us a lot to pay up our bills.
Worth noting, this settlement still allows us split the commission. The only actual change is we can't advertise the split on the MLS. Ok, so just call the listing agent and ask "are you offering a split" if the answer is no, then don't show your client that house and just show them a house that is offering to pay you.
You’re the problem
@@kanegrey7697 Wrong. This case is the problem. It didn't resolve anything, and it had no real foundation from the start.
Poor realesnakes!
The losers are both the buyers & the sellers. It will be the hardest on 1st time buyers trying to come up with money to pay their agent if this happens. I think what will happen, is that most sellers will still offer to pay the buyers agent commission.
Nah. I disagree. There will always be some buyer’s agent charging very low. It’s not that much work to be buyer’s agent anyway
@@seanzhao7525 You most likely have never been in the Real Estate business.
Why would any seller offer to pay exorbitant commissions when all realtors do is open doors and answer questions? They don't run title searches, they don't fill out paper work, they don't revise the sales agreement or deed (they're not attorneys), and they don't take part in the inspection or the city mandated fire code/inspection and occupancy documentation. They do absolutely nothing that is commensurate with 6% of the total price.
@@paranoidhumanoid you don't know what you're talking about; realtors do all of those things.
Around the world the commissions are 1 percent on each side in this country controlled by NAR lobby which has the blessings of crooked politicians for simply filling out few documents and making bank outrageous also these agents are paying upwards of two to 4000 dollars a year to nar for same data any one can get for free shameful I should know I am a ex agent
The best investment one can do right now is investing on real estate though stocks are good but ever since I swapped to real estate, I've seen so much difference.
I have been making a lot profit through real estate which has been the main source of my income.
I’m interested I want to move to real estate investment can you help me ?.
Sounds great! please I will appreciate your assistance on how to go about it, who's your coach and how good is your coach?
STEPHINE KOPP MEEKS is who i work with look her
Thanks for recommending i find her and left her message online
This guy doesn’t know the history of commissions. The sellers will continue to offer a payout, it just can’t be advertised. And in my area, we charge 7% in many instances.
At the end of the day, the seller will still paying. If you want tye buyer, you will have to pay otherwise the buyer would walk.
blackrock and vangaurd will buy....and we the peasents will rent...
Buyer brings the money to seller. So, I say buyer is paying both commissions.
Affordability of homes has nothing to do with agents commision ,
It is the feds interest rates. For a seller to sell and buy anew home they have to factor that $$$ in.hence why low supply high demand ,high home prices.
The real issue is the feds.
Your home is your bank and the money you gain equity with the best appreciation rates than any other investment.
The feds increase of interest rates is the real problem . You buy 500k home you owe the banks 900k.
With lower rates you are gaining equity compound interest in your own bank =Your home.
Lower rates is in every ones favor .
Cutting agents out will be a disaster for the economy. Lol crazy world vote trump
Seller don’t pay buyer’s agent . Seller paid the listing agent on whoever commissioned they agreed upfront. The listing agent is the one that compensated the buyers agent out of the whatever x% they agreed from the seller. And the seller is very much aware of the how many percentage this split will be. Seller signed the listing agreement contract and it’s in black and white.
In about 7-10 years, there will be no need for realtors anymore. I am working with software developers and title companies to make that a reality!
then ai will code you out of your gig. whats your point.
Listen - you’re going to make less just like the loan broker/loan officer after the GFC. You don’t deserve to make 3%, loan officers on average make 1-1.5% of the loan amount, they’re still surviving and making a living. Better get used to it because it is what it is. Technology is changing your industry, back in the 90’s, my parents would go to AAA, pay 10% to the travel agent, those days are clearly gone and people are traveling just fine. You will still get paid but it’s going to be less.
@@paranoidhumanoidyou better be prepared to include fair housing violations and non-disclosures from sellers about latent defects in your software
@@fedism😂😂😂 so true
On the surface it seems like a lot to pay for a buyer's agent but consider 10%-15% a buyer would loose due to novice negotiation skills. Negotiation doesn't end when your offer is accepted by the seller lol... I believe this is the greatest that could ever happen to our industry now the public will see our value..... Remember this post... 😉
Novice? The realtor has to get approval from the seller on actions to take, they have no say. Stop trying to propagate financial illiteracy. You do not need a realtor to sell or buy a house.
Lmao 🤣 a realtor thinks he’s essential, you’re not a doctor or nurse you’re not needed. You’re essentially a scummy used car salesman
Only beneficiary of this settlement was the law firm which took 30% to 40% commission. The commission split to buyers agent was part of the listing agents commission. Listing agents can still pay compensation to buyers agents but it can’t be disclosed in the MLS. So buyers agents will be calling listing agents before showing homes to discuss compensation and in some cases steer their buyer clients toward the listings with compensation. If buyers agree to pay their agent compensation they won’t br able to roll that into their loan so they will need more cash to buy a home. How will that help buyers? It won’t. Look for more home purchases by funds buying up rental units (depressing supply of owner occupied homes) and more dual agency law suits.
YEp! and they even price fixed THIER fees and won.... such a disgusting suit. This will devastate the industry and any chance for buyers to easily purchase in the future...
Can’t happen fast enough. Most realtors are non value added and just get in the way of transactions. If a buyer chooses to use a buyers agent, they need to pay that buyers agent a fee they agree on. Same with the seller. The seller, if they choose to use a realtor they should pay that realtor a fee, and those fees should never ever cross. Commission fees should also never have anything to do with the price of the house. If I pay a buyers agent, I will pay them $500-1000 for every $10,000 they negotiate the price down from listing.
REALTORS are LANDSHARKS
Zillow’s only chance is to configure a fleet of self driving teslas and create an AI based digital agent to talk about the property on your way to view it.
Good luck accessing the keys to show the property via lockbox.
Doesn’t require brains or high skills for someone to show a house. A doctor or nurse you need, realtors are not essential lmao 🤣
@@kanegrey7697 I guess the most important and valuable asset a person may purchase coincidently is also the most litigious industry due to something called non-disclosure. What could possibly go wrong? PS, I am not in that industry but I get it.
Fun fact before this news broke, commissions have always been negotiable, but that old saying has been fairly accurate in my life, you get what you pay for.
The Seller has traditionally compensated the Buyer's broker for the Buyer's commission because the cash required for a buyer is so high. The buyer must come up with their down payment, closing costs and now their buyer's commission? The Seller that is sitting on equity can offset the Buyer's fee at settlement, thereby bringing more buyers to their listing. The fees have always been negotiable.
Nothing is going to change, sellers will still pay buyer agents 2% - 3% commissions to bring them buyers and 5% - 6% commissions to sell overall. If you pay attention to the details, the only change is that agents cannot list the buyers agents commission in MLS. Listing agents are still able to share the commission they charge sellers and offer buyer agents commission to bring buyers. Nothing has been stated that commissions need to be lowered or that buyers need to pay their own commission, that is not going to happen. The only thing that will change is there will be a new way that listing agents communicate how much commission buyers agents are receiving. That will be the only change. Also New Construction Builders will continue to pay commissions to buyers agent to bring them buyers, so the resale market will need to stay in line and pay buyers agents as well. No major changes will happen.