quote:

Originally posted by mtb1bkr:
This area is a large buyers market so most houses sell at asking price with the seller not paying closing costs and little negotiation.

That doesn't make sense. If it's a "buyer's market," that means sellers make more concessions to sell a property, most especially in reducing the selling price. You mean it's a "seller's market?"

quote:

There's not really anything our realtor is going to find out from me that I would be worried about him passing on to the buyers.

He's forbidden from doing that, anyway. He operates under strict codes of confidentiality and, should he violate it, could lose his license.

quote:

We are moving to komifornia and probably going to buy a house there as well, but the area, 29 Palms, has seen a huge drop in home prices just in the last 6 months. Hopefully it stays there, or goes down further.

I was living there till three years ago. I warned everybody I could about the impending collapse. My wife just got back from a visit. In the Modesto paper, there were seven pages of foreclosures.

Now is not a good time to buy. Their prices have a lot of adjusting to do.

The only way I'd buy is a) if I truly loved the house, b) wanted it to be my home, c) planned to stay there............forever, d) could easily afford it without having to do any "creative" financing and, e) didn't necessarily need it for "investment" purposes.

If it met the above criteria, I'd buy it.

You got me Tom, it's a seller's market here, not a buyers market.

If we buy a house in 29 Palms it will be our primary residence for the 3-4 years we are there. Then, when we leave, we will rent it as 29 Palms is a big rental area because of the high turnover of military folks there. We are going to be buying well below what we can afford, or not buy at all. 29 Palms is a buyers market. There are houses out there that have been on the market for 5-6 months and might not have seen an offer. I'm going to try to take a 10 day trip out there later this month to check some houses out, then we'll see what we are going to be getting in to.

Bill

quote:

Originally posted by mtb1bkr:
You got me Tom, it's a seller's market here, not a buyers market.

If we buy a house in 29 Palms it will be our primary residence for the 3-4 years we are there. Then, when we leave, we will rent it as 29 Palms is a big rental area because of the high turnover of military folks there. We are going to be buying well below what we can afford, or not buy at all. 29 Palms is a buyers market. There are houses out there that have been on the market for 5-6 months and might not have seen an offer. I'm going to try to take a 10 day trip out there later this month to check some houses out, then we'll see what we are going to be getting in to.

Bill

Be careful. In an area of high foreclosures and empty houses, rental units increase exponentially. When there are more rental units available, rental prices decrease, thus reducing your potential income.

Have somebody help you crunch the numbers to make sure you'll be able to cover your expenses with the proposed rental income.

You're going to be leaving kal in 3 to 4 years? My guess is that kalifornia's market will be approaching stabilization in about 3 to 4 years. Hardly enough time for you to have built equity.

Best of luck whatever you choose.

commisions are ALWAYS negotable, but this is done before you sign the contract.

often to make a deal, the agent(listing or selling) will give up some commision, when having both ends of a deal this is more likely to happen..but there is no hard or fast rule, its up to the agent

agency law is different state to state

in 15 years, I have never shown a property based on the commision nor have I only shown house/land that I have listed......its just stupid to do so.

I am a Realtor, as such, IF IT NOT IN THE ORIGINAL LISTING CONTRACT, no such luck.
That said, it is not uncommon to reduce an 'In House' deal to help get a deal done.
I know what most people think of Realtors, just above (sometimes)used cars salesmen, most Realtors I have had contact with are very honest, hard working people.
I know most of you work and what would you think if you,your boss said to you, I am not going to pay you a full wage because it was too easy of a job. What would you reaction be?

Like I said, I have a axe to grind. Maybe this wasn’t the place, for that I do apologize.
What I know is from personal dealings with realtors (working for me & working for them).A lot of them here are more like investors/ realtors and I have got to listen in to their remarks. I will try to contain myself and my opinions

there are "some" real turds in the biz(as there are in ANY biz) I will give you that....but hopefully most will be going away.

sold cars before I sold real estate (but my folks have been in the RE biz for over 40 years) had my RE license the day I turned 18...then ran heavy equipment untill my back was blown out

quote:

Originally posted by SEG:
Like I said, I have a axe to grind. Maybe this wasn’t the place, for that I do apologize.
What I know is from personal dealings with realtors (working for me & working for them).A lot of them here are more like investors/ realtors and I have got to listen in to their remarks. I will try to contain myself and my opinions

I would not take less for commissions even if it would mean losing the deal. When the Realtor has the buyer & the seller that is great it is called double dipping. Any Realtor worth his or her salt is not going to take less monies. Some do I would not. When that happens to me I just tell the seller no way I am taking less monies. And I have double dipped plenty of real-estate. The seller may try however I would never give in. Any good Realtor is going to get you more monies for your home or property so why would you want them to take less monies. I have listed properties, land etc. and sold them the same day. Sometimes you just get lucky. I love to negotiate that is the challenge for me. It is the ABC's Always Be Closing. You can always try to get the Realtor to lower his or her commission. I just do not think it would be advantageous to you. I would put an incentive clause in the contact. Bring me a ready, willing and able buyer within 90 days at my price I would pay a few extra points extra if the commission was six or seven % I would kick it up to eight to ten% Trust me your house or property will shown the most. And I would price my property to move time is money.
Good Luck

sometimes it comes down to 1-2K between a deal or no deal, if they seller cant or the buyers wont, "sometimes" I will reduce my commision to make the deal. its not often but to make a deal I will consider it

having both ends doesn not mean only 1/2 the work for 2x's the payment....it can be alot more work or no more than normal

quote:

Originally posted by buckwheat01:
I would not take less for commissions even if it would mean losing the deal. When the Realtor has the buyer & the seller that is great it is called double dipping. Any Realtor worth his or her salt is not going to take less monies. Some do I would not. When that happens to me I just tell the seller no way I am taking less monies. And I have double dipped plenty of real-estate. The seller may try however I would never give in. Any good Realtor is going to get you more monies for your home or property so why would you want them to take less monies. I have listed properties, land etc. and sold them the same day. Sometimes you just get lucky. I love to negotiate that is the challenge for me. It is the ABC's Always Be Closing. You can always try to get the Realtor to lower his or her commission. I just do not think it would be advantageous to you. I would put an incentive clause in the contact. Bring me a ready, willing and able buyer within 90 days at my price I would pay a few extra points extra if the commission was six or seven % I would kick it up to eight to ten% Trust me your house or property will shown the most. And I would price my property to move time is money.
Good Luck

State to state real estate represntation varies.
In Minnesota:

"Home buyers on the cutting edge of what's current in the Real Estate industry are choosing agents that ONLY represent home buyers. Buyer agents are a fairly new phenomenon. Before 1987, all real estate agents represented the home seller. Law suits initiated by home buyers brought this fact out in the open.

Home buyers realized that "Nobody told us who represented who, we had no idea that the agent involved didn't represent us, too." Consumer action groups demanded a change in the industry to "even the playing field". As a result, Exclusive Buyer Agencies sprung up all over the country. These changes brought about the implementation of disclosure forms which the State of Minnesota dictates real estate agents must make sure you, as the home buyer, understand...The other forms of representation include:

Seller agent: Representing the seller. Could become a dual agent.
Buyer agent: Representing the buyer. Could become a dual agent.
Dual agent: Dual agency occurs when the same salesperson or real estate company represents both parties to a real estate transaction. This role limits the level of representation the salespeople can provide, and prohibits them from acting exclusively for either party.
Facilitator: A broker or salesperson that performs services for a buyer, a seller or both but does not represent either party.
Exclusive Buyer Agent: Representing ONLY the home buyer at all times and NEVER represents the seller..."
http://www.buyersrealestategroup.com/representation_27581.html

Having bought and sold property in multiple states, it was interesting to see the differences.
In Louisiana, because of the Napoleonic Code in place at the time, as a home buyer we were automatically represented by a real estate attorney, who as one item, listed all of the possible variations for your name, an example being James, Jim, Jimmy, Jimmie, etc. for just the first name possibilities on a document and you signed your legal name, but all of the possibilities were legal also. Perhaps Cajunlawyer or HoustonRick, or others, can explain the interesting twist.

OK, I was a licensed Realtor in Fla for several years. When I was there I primarily focused on ommercial properties, but also handled a residential listing from time to time. I left the state about 6 years ago, so things could have changed.

When I was working proprties there were essentially 3 types of agency. You listed a property as an exlusive Seller Agent, you worked as an exclusive Buyer Agent, or you took in a property as a Transaction Agent. The first two are self explanitory.

A Transation Agent was identified as such in the listing contract and was allowed to handle both the buying and selling sides of the deal. The seller had to be fully aware of the Transaction Agent contract and fully understand the Transaction Agent fully represented neither the seller nor buyer. They merely brought them together and 'tweaked' the negotiation.

The commission for a Transaction contract were typically less than the average 6% - usually about 4%.

The Transaction brokerage also kept the listing as an 'in-house' listing, meaning the Brokerage would not deal with Agents from other Realty companies. Their buyers, if seriously interested in the selling property, had to go to the Transaction Agent.

The contract you sign with an agency has a time period specified. Usually 60-90 days. Be very, very careful with this clause, particularly if you sign a Transaction type of contract.

You can cancel any listing contract in less than the specified period of time, but should you wind up selling the property to a person who viewed it while it was under contract, then you will owe the full commission to the original lister. The Courts will always support the Realtor in such a case.

I never liked the Transaction listing. I recommend you ONLY ontract a property with a SELLER's agency. Let the Buyer bring in their own agent. Keeps people's hands cleaner.

Commissions are always negotiable. A lot of Realty companies list their share of the co-broke (on 6%, for example) as 3% + $150, which is a rip-off for the Buyer's agent, but that option is entirely up to the Seller, not the listing agency, no matter what they say.

Good luck with your sale!

I use only one certain Realtor here, (Remax).

He charges 6% and always ends up getting only 5% if I end up cutting my price any at all.

If another Realtor sells my property, they split the Realtor fee, simple as that.

I guess I'll let the seller be a dual agent if it comes down to that. I hope it's sold to someone represented by another agency so I won't have to worry about it. I don't plan to drop my price as a majority of the houses sold at my price range are sold at the asking price. Only time will tell I guess. Thanks for all the input from you guys in the industry.

Bill

quote:

Originally posted by mtb1bkr:
I guess I'll let the seller be a dual agent if it comes down to that. I hope it's sold to someone represented by another agency so I won't have to worry about it. I don't plan to drop my price as a majority of the houses sold at my price range are sold at the asking price. Only time will tell I guess. Thanks for all the input from you guys in the industry.

Bill

I don't plan to drop my price as a majority of the houses sold at my price range are sold at the asking price.

You have no way of knowing that. The sale price and the actual price the buyer paid sometimes are two entirely different things. You have no idea things that may have been written into the deal things like the buyer may want a decorating allowance of 15k to cover decorating, carpeting, painting and items like that. Or any other clause can be added to accomplish the same goal. The house may have sold at full asking price you have no way of knowing the amount that was kicked back or credits at closing. Sale price is the same as any amount they are just numbers on paper.

BW, good points. I do have a way of knowing on two of the recent sales. One was my neighbor who was on the market for 12 days and got what they were asking and only ~$200 in repairs. The other one was sold by a friend and was pretty much the same.

Bill