Okay this thread has been alternately boring and cloddishly inane.
There are 2 rather dumb narratives going on here:
There is the:
I-have-a-strategy-that-will-get-me-a-better-price-and-maybe-some-of-the-lazy-agent’s-commission narrative
or the:
you-need-representation-or-you-will-get-screwed-(and-I-need-job-security) narrative
Both have some validity but are basically retarded because they are dependent entirely on counter factuals (you would have gotten a better deal if…).
So here is some data:
This is a list of all properties in 92101 that have closed that went pending (not closed) in the last 90 days.
Here is the subset list of all of those properties where the listing office and buyer’s office were the same office( I used office instead of agent because often agents will hide a double end by putting one of the ends under an assistant or RE partner).
As you can see the average ppsf was higher for those deals where the buyer’s rep was part of the same shop as the seller’s rep.
This is a statistical example of what agents already know colloquially, and it supports the assertions of both the pro and anti buyer agent camps. (note: the double-ended deals closed faster)
Bottom line:
Having a buyer agent who is unrelated to the listing agent is better for total price and it is also true that buyer agents can be an impediment to actually doing a deal.
That may be because the buyer’s agent is more likely to dig in on price and repairs or it may be just that buyer’s agents are contrary. Whatever.
One word of caution:
Many people think that they can get the benefits of one without the drawbacks (I know enough that I won’t overpay). That is a bit like saying that you will be the one dude in your cellblock not to get raped or the one freshman who gets a hot female roommate.
Its not a winning strategy to be too smart by half.
