Lately I’ve been wondering about not using a realtor when buying a house. I’d appreciate comments from knowledgeable posters on this site…
From my experiences, a buyer’s agent doesn’t bring that much to the deal any more. MLS access is easy so the only thing the buyers agent brings to the table is negotiation skills, and some knowledge about the real estate transaction. While I’m not an expert on real estate transactions, I have bought before and while there was a lot of paper work, nothing was that difficult, or worth paying someone 30k for doing. What’s more the buyer’s agent is motivated to close a deal, just like a seller’s agent, not to represent your best interests, so as a negotiator, they are not necessarily on your side. (If they know you can spend more, they might easily let the seller’s agent know that, and encourage them to counter higher than they might have. After all, a higher price is more commission)
However, if I assume that I’m going to do the MLS research, negotiate on my own behalf, and help with the real estate transaction, why not use the seller’s agent? The way I see it, if I make an offer using the seller’s agent, that agent will get the full commission instead of splitting it with a buyer’s agent. Getting the full commission instead of splitting it is a strong incentive for the seller’s agent to encourage the buyer to accept my offer, even if it is a low ball offer. (Getting 6% of 800k is definitely better than 3% of a mil)
Now, I know what you’re thinking. “Nah XBoxBoy, don’t be silly, the seller’s agent would never put their own interest in receiving a full commission over the interests of the seller.” So, maybe I’m naive in thinking that this strategy would have any benefit.
So what about it Piggys? If you are buying, and are looking to make a low ball price, would it be better to have your own agent, or just use the seller’s agent?
