Although I’m not in favor of anecdotes, here goes: We are currently selling our home on the east coast and received an offer after our listing agreement had expired and before we relisted (we had gotten kind of discouraged and had decided to put off relisting until the kids were back in school). We were much more willing to come down in price (and did come down more than we had originally planned to) since we didn’t have an agent’s fee to pay. The final steps of the negotiation here take place in the “attorney review” process, so our attorney is taking care of some of the jobs that would be done by an agent/broker in CA. So in this case, the buyer is getting a better deal than he would have otherwise because there is no listing agent involved.[/quote]
njtosd, I don’t know what your current time frame is, but in CA, you would have *typically* (unless your listing agent agreed to modify the “stock” language – very rare) had to wait 181 days after your listing agreement had expired to avoid paying your former listing agent a commission on your current sale, if your current buyers EVER contacted your listing agent at all or were shown the property by a co-broke agent during the time of the active listing. From your standpoint, until you get your final attorney bill at COE, you will not know whether you made out better to have your attorney handle your transaction as a FSBO, than if you would have had a RE agent handle it. My point with drboom was that BUYERS DO NOT receive a better price THAN THEY WOULD HAVE under a typical listing agreement with a co-broke invitation. Whether your buyers DO receive a better price or not is purely subjective and/or based upon the comparable “sold comps” that occurred recently with RE broker intervention and facilitation.
