the botton lins is that the sellers have a botton line and they going to sell the home for x ammount of dollars on terms they can live with. Any realtor who doesn't treat both parties in the transanction with the same amount of respect is a fool. You must be honest to everyone or you lose out in the long run.

Mon May 12 2008, 13:43

Please take this unprofessional responses to another forum or just exchange emails.

Thu Apr 24 2008, 13:00

Absolutely ! I know of a couple properties near the Medical Center in you rprice range.
Let me know if you would like for me to email you some listings.
My service will not cost you anything - the seller pays my fee.

Hope this helps!

Juan Carlos

Wed Apr 23 2008, 15:21

Mark,

You didn't post that with a straight face, did you...?

http://www.johntreed.com/Kiyosaki.html



-

Wed Apr 23 2008, 13:10

Any buyer's agent that tells you that they are free are full of it. In nearly every case, the buyer pays for everything. EVERYTHING. The commission the agents receive is reflected in the cost of the house, so the buyer is paying a higer price to cover the commission. If you already are dealing with the selling agent, why insert another agent in the process. Now you have two people in between you and the seller. I only want one person in the deal I don't trust. The buyer's agent is a made up job. You can get all the information on a house, and effectively handle the deal yourself.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I love the "the buyer pays for everything" spin. I know a lot of agents say the same thing, and I can argue both sides of the fence here, because they are both correct. But the fact is, a house costs, say $500,000. Buyer brings 500,000 to the closing. Who cares if the seller agreed to pay 3 percent or 30 percent to the agent? It's still, costing the buyer 500,000. Buyer buys a FSBO, the FSBO is going to be generous and take that 3 or 30 percent off the price of the house? Not likely! Not any FSBOs I've known.

Another question: buyer pays 500,000 for a house. The homeowner has just put 4 kids thru college. Seller repays the loan from the proceeds of the sale of the house. Does that mean the buyer paid for the kids education, too?

Bottom Line: you can either have one agent on YOUR side, or BOTH agents on the seller's side. One agent working FOR you or both agents working AGAINST you. Makes no difference to me. And as Tim says, below, I don't cut my fee for handling both sides and I don't know anyone else who does either.

Wed Apr 9 2008, 07:38

Sorry, but I don't know one single listing agent who cuts their fee in half if a non-represented buyer offers to buy their listing. I list a home for 6% planning on paying 3% out to agents who show the property, negotiate for their buyer, arrange inspections, appraisals, financing, etc. If I am going to do all that work for a non-represented buyer (not to mention expose myself to the potential legal problems) then I am going to get paid the full 6% that ther seller has already agreed to.

Wed Apr 9 2008, 05:18

Any buyer's agent that tells you that they are free are full of it. In nearly every case, the buyer pays for everything. EVERYTHING. The commission the agents receive is reflected in the cost of the house, so the buyer is paying a higer price to cover the commission. If you already are dealing with the selling agent, why insert another agent in the process. Now you have two people in between you and the seller. I only want one person in the deal I don't trust. The buyer's agent is a made up job. You can get all the information on a house, and effectively handle the deal yourself.

Tue Apr 8 2008, 21:04

Buying without an agent sounds very apealing at first, based on the commission savings alone. But good Realtors bring value to the table in exchange for the commission. They also give the buyer access to a broader range of properties as "listed properties" are all committed to pay a buyer's agent commission. You cannot buy a listed property without an agent. You can only buy "For Sale By Owners". But consider this... Most FSBOs are not listed with a Realtor for one of several reasons. 1) They want more than the property is really worth so they can't afford to pay a commission 2) There is something wrong with the house or with the title that makes it impossible for a Realtor to sell 3) Seller Greed.

Sellers do not determine the value of their home, the market does. The market is made up of buyers, most of whom are represented by professional agents. As an unrepresented buyer you are in competition not only with the seller, but with other buyers who are better represented than you are. Sellers do not "decide how much they will sell their house for and then add a commission". Buyers decide that once the house is exposed to the market, so smart sellers are willing to offer a commission to the buyers agents who will bring lots of qualified buyers because this is how their property will sell for it's true value.

If you run across a FSBO that looks like a good deal, there's really nothing wrong with buying it without an agent. The risks are yours to take and if you're lucky you may come out ahead. Most people don't have the luxury of waiting around though for the perfect deal to fall in their lap so they will use a buyer's agent. Most people are also not trained at protecting themselves from the various risks involved with a typical real estate transaction. Buyer's agents REALLY ARE free.

Sun Mar 30 2008, 06:48

@ JR. I have sold 4 homes thus far. 3 condos and 1 townhouse. So if you are insinuating that i have never sold a property because i am answering a question
based on my experience then, yes Tman is right, "YOU HATE THE TRUTH".

Lets do the math here. Remember every seller has a number in mind that they want to get as their final price.
So i am going to assume that the seller in this case
knows what he wants from a deal and as such he is going to list his property as a price point to reflect what he wants to receive ultimately.

Take this case in point.
Owner has a property and wants to receive $390,100, he ask himself/herself, ok, i am willing to give-up/contribute to the buyer, in this case he/she decides it going to be $10,000,
he/she will then list his property at say $425,000. Why? well here is the math.

$425,000 - $10,000 (contribution/willing to give up) = $415,000 (sales prices seller is willing to accept)
$415,000 * 0.06 = $24,900 ($12,450. seller agent and $12450.00)
$415,000 - seller agent commission (3%) - buyers agent commission (3%) = $390,100

So what did we learn :

sellers agent would get $12,450
and your agent would get $12,450
and you would be either financing $415,000 or paying that cash.

SO HOUSE WOULD COST YOU $415,000
SELLER WOULD NET $390,100

If you do this without an agent.

Now make the offer without your agent.

Take the $10,000 the $425,000 that leaves us with $415,000

Now is where the real fun is, You already did the math and know that the would have to netted $390,100 if you had an agent, now since you don’t have a agent,
take another $10,000 off the $415,000.

NOW YOUR OFFER WILL BE FOR $405,000 - $12,150 (seller agents 3%) = $392,850 (seller recieves this amount)

$415,000 - $10,000 = $405,000 now seller pays his agent 3% ($12150)
$405,000 - $12150 (sellers agent commission ) = $392,850 seller receives.

BUT THE IMPORTANT THING TO NOTE HERE IS THAT THE COST PRICE TO YOU IS $405,000 AS OPPOSE TO $415,000 WITH A REALTOR.

Buying a house is one of the biggest financial decision you will ever make, DO THE MATH.. IT will save you money. I just showed you how to save $10,000 easy.

I have personally bought and sold 4 properties.

My final piece of advice, "Do the Math"

Sat Mar 29 2008, 18:34

WORTH IT!

It does not cost you to have a buyers agent! Your Buyers Agent can provide critical information when purchasing a home! And the seller pays, so you get this service for free!

WHY NOT?

Sat Mar 29 2008, 18:33

There are over 100 listing avaiable within your price range from $29,000 to $150,000, with 1-bedrooms plus located within the Medical Center market area. If your like I'll be happy to email you the listings?

Sat Mar 29 2008, 18:27

usually you don't buy apartments
they are called condos
buyers agent is worth it
but renting is cheaper right now
much cheaper
wait for housing prices to fall
median home should be about 180K
then ok to buy
currently it is 205K
which is an improvement of 219K from last year
wait
be patient

anyways

good luck

Tue Mar 25 2008, 13:15

As a Realtor who offers "buyer representation" I can tell you lots of reasons why having a qualified agent working for you is smart. Here are just a few from my experience:

1. If you are looking at FSBO's with a good buyer's agent they will take advantage of the fact that most people trying to sell their homes themselves don't really know what they're doing, but just believe they are saving money by doing it themselves. If I am your agent I will work their inexperience to your advantage during negotiations. There are so many traps that these people fall into.

2. Buyer's agents are an absolute necessity when buying a property that is listed with a seller's agent. Most people simply do not realize that the Seller's agent works for the seller. No matter how nice and honest and fair they are, they will not represent you adequately in negotiations.

3. Without exception, the best agents in our industry do not cut their fees because they do not have to. If I have a home listed for 6% I will pay buyer's agents half of it without blinking an eye because buyer's agents are the ones who bring me the buyers. The other half is mine because as a good listing agent I have spent time and energy and resources to attract the "buyer's agents" instead of just looking for buyers like the FSBOs do.

Tue Mar 25 2008, 10:17

Snore, so you're saying you made an offer for $300,000 (just to pick a number)... with your realtor, and the seller turned it down, because the numbers didn't work for him, (in part because he'd have to pay the Realtor's fees).

Then, you came back without your Realtor, offered 3% less than the $300,000 ($291,000 exactly what he would have been paying with the Realtor in place) Deducted an additional 1% ($288,000) and then they threw in a little toward closing costs. (Let's call it another thousand... for a total of $287,000).

So... with a Realtor the seller receives $291,000
Without the Realtor the seller receives $287,000...

$4,000 less than they would have gotten, if you'd purchased through the Realtor. And you say he did this because his bottom line number didn't make sense.

Sorry, this just doesn't make any sense. Unless, of course, quite a bit of time expired between the time of the first offer, and the time of the second offer, and the seller was now more motivated to accept a lower offer (which he likely would have accepted with or without a Realtor).

yeah... I just hate truth.

Tue Mar 25 2008, 06:34

Tman:
Good post Snor,

No matter what .. realtors just hate the truth.
~~~~~~~~~~~
Can you clarify this, Tman? What truth is it that realtors hate?

Tue Mar 25 2008, 06:29

All am saying is tell the guy the truth, the SELLER DOESN'T PAY THE COMMISSION the buyer does, since he is the only person who brings money to the closing table.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Come back and check in with us again when you SELL a house.

Tue Mar 25 2008, 06:28

The real problem is as i pointed out, the buyers agent get paid when the deal closes. If the deal doesn't close then the agent won't get paid. Now Elvs i don't know about your math but the seller is always looking at the net cost. In my situation, I did use a Realtor in the beginning, and the seller rejected the offer, why simply because his bottom line number didn't make sense.

All am saying is tell the guy the truth, the SELLER DOESN'T PAY THE COMMISSION the buyer does, since he is the only person who brings money to the closing table. You see once i learned and understood that, i never used a realtor again to buy.

Tue Mar 25 2008, 06:11