While Greg and I don’t agree on a lot of things (I think the National Association of Realtors may be worth saving, he holds a special vitriol for them), one thing we share is a passion for having buyers pay their buyer representatives.
With that premise, check out his new e-book (it’s a PDF) –
Buyers need to start asking better questions – nothing is free.
Why do sellers pay the buyer’s agent’s commission, with or without sub-agency? Because it works. Buyers get to look at houses â€œfor free.â€ The agent will set up searches â€œfor free,â€ driving the buyers from house to house â€œfor free.â€ And when it comes time to write a contract, the more the buyers pay for the home, the more the buyer’s agent will get paid. The seller is paying a percentage of the sales price, so the buyer’s agent’s pecuniary interest is aligned with that of the seller, not the buyers, his nominal clients. But â€” what the heck? â€” it’s all being done â€œfor free.â€
This is important. Divorcing the commissions â€” the buyer pays the buyer’s agent, the seller
pays the listing agent â€” is potentially the most significant reform that can be made today in
residential real estate.
It’s a novel concept: rather than have the buyer’s agent (and buyer) obligated to be paid whatever the seller may be offering, in the divorced commission model the buyer pays the buyer’s agent. Crazy, huh?