Welcome to the New RealTown! Submit Feedback
Member Login | Join RealTown
The Real Estate Network

Melanie's World

Jersey Shore, Pennsylvania

I will share my views and experiences on key real estate industry topics - agency, appraisal, and ethics. I welcome your comments.

Subscribe

Your E-mail Address:
Subscribe to:

Recent Comments

RE: My Month as "Ask the Expert"
we have a slevel home built in 1949 that has 4 bed...
RE: Gas Leases and the Jed Clampet Effect
I was wondering what your assessment of the situat...
RE: Ready ... or Not
I love your blog post- yes, it's too easy to get u...
RE: Dirty Little Secrets of Real Estate
Wonderful article.  I think a dose of the tru...
Ayden NC Homes for Sale
The variety of courses offered is great; as usual,...

Site Feed

RSS Feed

Melanie's World

Same Old, Same Old Doesn't Cut It

Nov. 23, 2007
Categorized in: Brokerage and Agency
Tagged with: agency, consumer, marketing, selling

I've been watching, bemused, as a consumer and a real estate agent dance to the same old steps of real estate, only without figuring out that the music has changed. The consumer is someone I know, who knows I'm a real estate educator. He is probably more candid than he should be with me. For instance, he freely admitted his opening list price was aspirational (my word, his meaning). He insisted on a short listing with the agent, and that more commission should go to the buyer's agent. A good thought, but the bonus is tied to a certain price, at a certain time. Supposedly, if he gets less, or later, no bonus. He also has a set up where his listing agent has to be present for all showings. In less than two weeks, he has already reduced the price. The steps are old. Real estate in today's market means listing it at the right price to start with. If the seller wants to take some money off, there are at least three better ways (that I can think of) to spend the money than just a reduction. One would be to buy down the interest rate, a second would be to pay some closing costs for the buyer, and a third (since this is a move-up house) would be to offer to pay the buyer's existing mortgage payments for 3-6 months. Alas, he isn't doing any of this, and neither is his agent. There is an eighteen month supply in this market for homes in this price range; why make it any more difficult for a buyer's agent to show the house ("Listing agent must be present for all showings") Then there's the term on the listing--90 days, per the owner, starting in November. In North Central PA, November begins the slowest three months in the real estate business. Yet, he and the agent are engaged in old dance steps---ones that probably won't get them to closing. The agent is letting the consumer call all the shots; and they are pretty much bad ones. The consumer, who purports to want his house sold, is insisting that the agent do it 'his way'. Same old, same old doesn't work anymore. Successful agents have a marketing plan, and they don't take listings if the sellers don't understand the difference between selling a house and marketing it. Successful agents also know that they are successful because they know what they are doing--and if someone asks them to dance this number, they just sit it out.

Melanie J. McLane, ABR, CRB, CRS, ePRO, GRI, RAA, SRES, 32 year veteran of the real estate industry. Offering training, speaking and consulting throughout the industry, I teach everything from ABR to USPAP. Certified ePRO Instructor. To contact me, email me at: melanie@TheMelanieGroup.com or visit my website: www.TheMelanieGroup.com

DOJ vs NAR

Oct. 16, 2007
Categorized in: Brokerage and Agency
Tagged with: consumer, doj, minimum services, nar

Last week, the Department of Justice started their own web site for consumers. Among other things, consumers can click on a state (displayed in a map of the United States) and find out if the state offers choices for consumers, and if the real estate agent can rebate 'some or all' of the commission back to the consumer. DOJ and NAR have been locked into a battle of wills on a couple fronts for some time. The DOJ is of the opinion that consumers do not have enough choices in terms of services (or minimum) services that licensees provide, and that 'minimum service' laws are contrary to the consumer's best interests. NAR, and many licensees, feel that real estate is an infrequent transaction, and that consumers are best served by having an agent who has minimal levels of duties and responsibilities to him or her. My observation today, short and sweet: all the license laws we now have were enacted, originally, to protect the consumer. We have lots of choices for consumers in our industry; and I think most agents provide real value for their clients. Our industry is no more perfect than any other, but before we decide that the answer is less responsibility and fewer duties, let's consider what benefits the consumer. Can the average consumer price a home correctly (with or without Zillow?) Can they negotiate? Are they able to complete the paperwork needed for the transaction? Can they protect their own interests? Or, does the average consumer need a fair amount of assistance for a very complicated process with multiple players?