It's probably just a RE marketing ploy to get buyers interested.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevo
Printable View
It's probably just a RE marketing ploy to get buyers interested.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevo
always like your point of viewQuote:
Originally Posted by Kevo
I keep thinking prices will come down in less than desirable places but 10k reduction on something that is overpriced by 100 - 150k is chump change
I was doing stupid financial personal wealth stuff in my head this weekend (too many edibles) and i thought about paying off my mortgage as one a move but why would you pay it off if the interest is right under 3%
the boomers last parting gift to us is trillions of dollars in debt
Inheritance tax should be implemented to take care of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by fastfred
"Americans have roughly $156 trillion in assets, according to Visual Capitalist, but half of that wealth — $78.1 trillion — belongs to the baby boomers."
:fmicon:
but wait what about my trust fund?Quote:
Originally Posted by skaredshtles
The nation thanks you for your sacrifice.Quote:
Originally Posted by fastfred
It looks like Kalispell home prices have dipped back down from their peak in my passing observation. They are still on the high side, but not too far above pre-covid trend. Fair amount of new building and new subdivisions which is taking pressure off existing housing. Lot of different types of home out there available to choose from.
Whitefish prices don't seem to have budged, mostly driven by limited inventory. Stuff may sit around longer and there are people trying unsuccessfully to slap lipstick on a pig and sell it for a million bucks, but anything good goes for asking.
Lot less building activity and the stuff that's going in is not the kind of stuff that will help ease prices. Don't get me wrong, I know developers are going to build houses for rich people, but I wish they were at least for rich people who are gonna live here. I'd rather see one 1.5m house with a resident family than two $750k houses that just become second homes or vacation rentals.
this weekend I started discussing hypothetically buying a place in Winter Park, so if things are going to crash, let's get it over with so I can buy at the bottom, m'kay?
Can they be sued for false advertising?Quote:
Originally Posted by yeahman
Anecdotally, I had 3 meetings with former buyers in the past month that were looking to upgrade, despite the change in interest rate that that would entail. Perhaps people are wrapping their head around current rates (that are close to historical averages, just much higher than the recent historical lows)Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevo
I'm going to propose to our listing agent a commissions schedule where we pay 6% for an offer at list price, 5% for an offer $10k under list, etc. At our list price, that works out so we share any gap between list and sale price evenly between us, the buyer's agent, and the seller's agent. I feel like that aligns incentives much better than a guaranteed 6% (or 5% or whatever) when we sell.
I'm interested to see how she responds, I suspect she'll find a reason why it's not a good idea, but maybe I'm selling her short.
Why not incentivize your agent the other way around? 3% for list, 4% for $10k over list, 5% @$25k over list, and 6% for >$25,001 over list?
I like this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Toadman
Pretty sure the chances of selling over list price are worse than our Powerball oddsQuote:
Originally Posted by Toadman
Choosing incentives based on "list price" seems odd to me, when that is an arbitrary number that you pick. It's not like "list price" is some objective number that truly defines the value of your house.
The clause I've always thought about is making to the listing agent but a fuse on their contract. As in, "you tell me what the listing price is and you tell me how long you need to sell it".
Our sellers agent came up with the list price through a scientific process of evaluating comps and deep study of the state of the market, i.e., it's an arbitrary number that she came up with and told us she could get for our house. It happens to be a number that we're comfortable with, so we're just asking her to put her money where her mouth is, not just our money where her mouth is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
Location, price point.Quote:
Originally Posted by dan_pdx
,
2 houses one block from me both sold in less than 5 days this week, both for 20%+ above list. (List 1.29, sold 1.615, list 1.325 sold 1.575.)
Another went on the mrkt last April at 3.39 and finally sold at 2.675 this March after several mark downs from the over reach.
Yeah...easy to game this system...just list at $26k below the price you think it will actually sell for and take home your doubled commission! Just like any time you see someone happy that their agent sold their house "first weekend and above asking" it just makes you question whether their agent mispriced the house.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
Those numbers also stop making sense at higher price points. Obviously they were just randomly thrown out, but on a $1m listing, giving an extra 1% in commission in exchange for $10k in higher price would leave you with LESS money in your pocket.
That said, there is some merit to the idea of bonus commissions. There's a ton of evidence out there that the flat commission system prioritizes quick sales with the least effort. I don't know what would be a good benchmark, but escalating the payment if you beat the benchmark would better align incentives.
Leave it to TGR to find a way to “beat” the real estate game. An incentive to the Buyer’s agent to sell the house for a higher price is exactly why there was a class action lawsuit. In essence you’re attempting to bribe them into prioritizing the deal over their clients interest i.e. their fiduciary agency agreement that they vowed to protect when they licensed. I know none of you believe it exists, but evidently only a few of us do in fact believe in that principle.
Listing price shouldn’t be arbitrary. It’s pretty easy to reach consensus within 2.5% to 5% with a few experienced brokers. From there you pick a strategy based on available inventory vs. active buyers.
While you’re out there re-inventing the wheel, just don’t neglect the things that actually matter like the house being buffed to a shine, staged properly, complete disclosures with all repairs and maintenance records, pro photos, and a complete marketing package that has your house syndicated onto every platform imaginable. That’s typically what gets the house sold. Also, personally I still believe in open houses. Simply because they work.
Hopefully Spokanistan is bouncing back this Spring and you get a great offer Dan. Its certainly possible.
Of course it's not completely arbitrary. But it's far from an objectively specific number. First off, 5% on a 500,000 home is 25,000, hardly chump change. In fact, that kind of variance fits exactly within the incentive structure Dan proposed. I'm not suggesting I agree with his structure, but if "offer over asking" is some kind of goal to pin compensation to, $25k of difference in what you think is a (somewhat) objective number is significant.Quote:
Originally Posted by lowsparkco
My point in calling it arbitrary wasn't that it's some unknowable choice ranging from 200k to 500k, of course it is based on comps as well as strategy based on market conditions. But that doesn't lead to a specific number choice. My agent wanted us to list $25k (or even $50k) below what we wanted to list at, and we ignored his advice. We sold exactly at asking price; maybe we would have sold at the same price regardless of the chosen listing price, or maybe if we listed it for $25k lower we would have sold for "$15k over asking" while still in real world dollars getting $10k less while everyone (or at least the realtor) crowed about how his client got thousands over asking price. [eta: to be fair, maybe had we listed at his suggested price we would have created more action and received even more money than we ultimately did; I don't think so given what I knew about the market at the time, but it is possible]
It's a pet peeve of mine how people pay so much attention to "asking price" and whether something was over or under that, when that doesn't really matter nearly as much as the actual sale price. And whether something goes for over asking or not is a function of where that asking price is, and in fact the "over asking" thing can be gamed by a realtor (sometimes in coordination with a seller but not always). That's what I mean by arbitrary, and that's why I objected to Dan pinning compensation to whether that arbitrary number was hit.
Depends on your list/asking price!Quote:
Originally Posted by dan_pdx
^^^^^^
exactly!
Sure, but that was the other part of the post…. how many months of inventory are on hand at your price point, with your amenities, lot size, etc. - there are certainly a lot of strategies, but the two ends of the spectrum are price high, be patient, advertise like crazy and be willing to move price down slowly OR underprice and move it quick, but basically you’re taking highest and best after a weekend of open houses. So, do you go $495k and hope she sells in 3 days for $515k or do you start and $550k and hope someone in the first 90 days can’t live without it and offers $535k and then beats you up on $15k of concessions. That’s the game, but it should all be within a pretty narrow band if you’re using a real professional. It’s not complicated, but it’s hard to manipulate as are most relatively unrestricted markets.
I swore off this thread a long time ago, and will probably put it on mute again, but as a semi-retired RE professional - the best advice for both buyers and sellers - especially two that are as intelligent as Danno and dan_pdx - is…. Dig in a little. Find a reputable broker that you have excellent communication with, enjoy their company and go all in. Meanwhile being patient. Think about the big picture. Are you handy, willing to do improvements before or after the sale, have a network of contractors? Monetize everything. Know what you’re paying for, make the best decision you can and move on.
That thought definitely crossed my mind - by reducing the buyer's commission for offers under list price, we're incentivizing them to push their client to offer list price, which is maybe a little morally gray. But given that it's accepted that offering 3% to the buyer's agent will yield more traffic than offering 1%, I feel like what we're contemplating is a difference in degree but not in kind.Quote:
Originally Posted by lowsparkco
One thing with our proposed commissions schedule (which our agent may just laugh and reject, TBD) is that it makes it financially feasible for us to sell at, say, 5% under list. Under the traditional model of a fixed 5% or 6% commission to the agents, if the best offer we got was 5% under list, we'd just hold on to it.
Thanks mang! Roger that on the house prep, we're going to check all those boxes except maybe the open house. I know supply is still low and houses are selling. Ours has some good points, we'll see how things go.Quote:
Originally Posted by lowsparkco
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowsparkco
Yeah, in our case, we came up with a number that works for us financially and asked our listing agent if it was in the realm of reason. She pulled comps etc and came back and recommended listing at the number we had mentioned. So...would she have come up with a different number if we hadn't told her what we thought we needed? Maybe. It's not arbitrary from our point of view because it's about what we need to make the transaction reasonable for us, otherwise we'd just keep it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
I actually had a "we buy houses in cash!" guy come through and look at the house. He was refreshingly direct, said if his company was listing the house they wouldn't do any work and would list it about 5% under the number our agent suggested. Then he said "the amount we could pay you if we were listing at that price is insultingly low, so we don't even need to talk about it." Ha! Has anyone in this industry ever been that straightforward? I got him to spill the beans and his number was something like 30% under our listing price, but I appreciated the transparency.
Re: the incentive structure I proposed, if we sell for 10k less than listing, everyone (seller and the two agents) makes about 3,300 less than they would at list price, and so on at subsequent lower price points. Like I said above, that makes it possible for us to consider price points that would otherwise be untenable...doesn't that align our interests with the agents? Wouldn't they rather see a sale and some commission (even if it's less than the full 3%) than fart around with the showings and going back and forth on offers and winding up with no deal and no money?