New nar rules for agents. will alternative models destroy the ease of appraiser getting that info.

[David S]

It won't be immediate, but over time, we are going to see a whole different transaction model emerge.

It is not going to be sellers pay sellers agent and buyers pay buyers agent. I don't see how the websites with all the eyeballs like Redfin and Zillow don't find a way to take advantage and monetize it down the road. Combine this with what ICE is doing on the mortgage side and the GSE's trying to get rid of appraisal and title, and real estate might one day be considered a liquid asset.

I heard to use blockchain replace the title, can be sold 1% or 0.01% of the ownership.

 

[David S]

1. They only have to reduce the fees by 1/3 or 6% down to 4%. Some agents sell homes for 2% or less (but then can't use a NAR MLS service due to the low commission).
2. The seller will save some money.
3. The broker is going to have less funds to pay third party help like photographers and staging companies - and they will quite possibly suffer quite a bit.
4. I don't think it has any significant impact on competition for the foreseeable future.
5. Of course listing agents will see their revenue drop.
.....

Buyer agent will see their revenue drop even more...

 

[Raven59]

The changes in the residential environment are already in place in the commercial space. It works fine there.

 

[David S]

Then why do we even need the MLS? We can search Zillow for sales. We can google up the addresses and find all those website listings? And our states brilliant lawyers told Realtors not to disclose financial terms - which is the only thing missing. It was supposedly personal financial information yet I can pull up the mortgage and see the term, the amount borrowed, who lent it (FNMA, FHA, VA rider, etc.) and compare to the listing amount which is also found on those website listings.

The suit purportedly allows brokers to opt out of the boards yet still under an open listing system, allow them to post to the MLS. I took it that perhaps even private sellers could be allowed to list and bypass the agents entirely, although that does not make sense. And NAR members are on the hook for nearly half a billion. Meanwhile, a co-defendant fights one and Keller-Wm (If I recall correctly) settled in a separate agreement for $70 million. Who pays that if not the agents working with them? And this is one of a dozen such suits.

The DOJ was part of the negotiations during Trump's administration. Biden's DOJ withdrew from the suit and now are wanting back in - guess they want to participate on this cash cow - probably under the idea that it is all white patriarchy and racism at work. So far the courts have balked at letting the DOJ in through the back door.

NAR fires back at the DOJ in reply brief

NAR isn't going down without a fight. In its latest brief it claims that allowing the DOJ to resume its probe would “destabilize the law."

www.housingwire.com

In June the Department of Justice filed a doozy of a first brief in its appeal of Judge Timothy J. Kelly’s late January ruling in favor of the National Association of Realtors (NAR). In turn, the trade group’s reply brief, filed last Friday, did not pull any punches.​

​

In the recent court documents, NAR claims that the government’s arguments for resuming the probe into the trade group’s Participation Rule and Clear Cooperation Rule were “alarming” and would “destabilize the law” if accepted.​

​

“The government settles vast numbers of enforcement actions against civil and criminal defendants,” NAR’s brief states. “Those defendants rely on the government to keep its word. A holding that an agency can escape its commitments as easily as DOJ claims it can here would call into question countless negotiated resolutions.”​

​

" We can search Zillow for sales" Zillow, Redfin doesn't have agent private mark, right? Also, it is not easy to search comps from Zillow or Redfin like MLS.
"We can google up the addresses and find all those website listings? " But you need to know comp first, then can do the search, right?

 

[Tom D]

ding, ding. you win chicken diner. i don't really care about the realtors, although i was a broker long ago. if sales disappear off the MLS, then how long will it take yous to find all the sales that help you decide, and show the reader you did your research. nightmare on elm st appraisal. although it will be worse for fannie avm.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

But you need to know comp first, then can do the search, right?

Well... looks easy to me. SOLDs, price range or bed and bath and home type and "More" lets you limit 3 yr to six months or less

 

[Fernando]

The changes in the residential environment are already in place in the commercial space. It works fine there.

In the past when I was interested in commercials, I would see the listing and then would call the listing agent about the commission.
If compensation not that good, I reconsider about that listing.
Commissions do affect agents in whether to pursue and continue with that listing.

 

[David S]

I don't see evidence where these toothless rules will result in lower commissions, frankly.

Yes, the case didn't say about how much the agent commission should be. They only say seller shall pay listing agent's commission only. The buyer agent shall ask buyer for the commission directly. The ripple effect is: which buyer is willing to pay buyer agent's commission and for how much. I can do everything except writing the contract. Why I need to pay you so much!

 

[Fernando]

Yes, the case didn't say about how much the agent commission should be. They only say seller shall pay listing agent's commission only. The buyer agent shall ask buyer for the commission directly. The ripple effect is: which buyer is willing to pay buyer agent's commission and for how much. I can do everything except writing the contract. Why I need to pay you so much!

In a buyer's market, I can see how one can "do everything" themselves with the "help" of the listing agent.
In a seller's market, buyers need good buyer agent to negotiate and deal with seller in quickly moving deals. Seller holds the cards in the transaction.
Losing a great property over commission issues is not worth it in not being the winning ratified offer.

 

[David S]

A buyer in a sense, does cover the seller s agent commission in the higher price of the house, out of which proceeds the seller s' ledger side pays out the sales commission.

Teh whole thing is a scam in sense because essetnailly, the RE commission is financed by the buyer in a price to cover the commission, even though technically the seller "pays it" out of their proceeds side of the ledger at closing - if either side or both a, buyer and seller, had to pay, out of their own pocket the funds for the commission apart from the sale price, THEN and only then would commissions drop like a rock.

This new rules of do not put the listing and selling commissions on MLS as a solution is a joke - it is the same old same old just not disclosed on the MLS - makes it worse IMO not better.

That's true: Up to right moment, from accounting (or book) view, the seller pay both agent's commissions, but from investment (or financial) view, the buyer pay both agent's commissions. Because from whole transaction, the buyer provide the money, seller provide the house, the deal is done.