[bearishgurl]

I don’t understand the demographic shortages in those New England states so much because I haven’t been there.

I HAVE been to Wyoming a few times, however, and it was all I could do to keep my scarf on my head and my hand on the gas pump – in the middle of Rock Springs in the SUMMER. The wind there blows s-o-o-o hard. The two-lane state hwys are open 2-3 mos. year. If you are on one of them, don’t be in a hurry. You may have to wait for than 20 mins. for an entire herd of sheep, buffalo or cattle to mosey across. They have the right-of-way.

I recommend traveling with wool blankets, flashlights, flares, batt charger, down sleeping bags, etc. during the winter, as well as a CB antenna. If you find yourself in the unfortunate position to be driving I-80 thru there in the dead of winter, the MOST IMPORTANT RULE you MUST adhere to is . . . Whoever is biggest WINS, period. Those triple tractor-trailers roaring thru there have chains on at least 20 out of their 26+ wheels and when they come up behind or alongside your passenger vehicle, pull WAY OVER on the shoulder and let them HAVE THEIR WAY! Use your rug, rock salt/sand and shovel (and your passengers pushing) to get your veh. back onto the road. You won’t sink in a ditch because the snow is compacted and piled up to 25 feet high on the sides of the road by plows, propped up by several rows of 10′ high “snow-fences” (to keep the wild goat and bighorn sheep off the road).

Just one single loose chain flying off those trucks could hit your veh. windows and kill you or one or more of your passengers. Just ONE granny gear slipping or brake failure and . . . your veh. is HISTORY (as well as everyone inside). STAY AWAY!! 2nd RULE, if you can no longer SEE see the difference bet. your veh, the road and the sky, exit the hwy as soon as you see some civilization. Don’t expect your cell phone to work everywhere. Tune your CB radio to the hwy patrol-band. Have your passenger(s) looking for you b/c the road signs will be covered with snow. Do not be picky – there are no Sheraton’s around there. Check into a no-tell motel and wait out the storm. Follow a plow back up the hwy ramp the next morning.

Now, if you were a kid attending Wyoming’s ONE big university in Laramie ONLY because it was “in-state,” how fast do you think it would take you to leave the state upon graduating with a degree?? It’s a different life there, IMO, certainly not for the faint of heart.

Sr. citizens are drawn to WY, MT and NM BECAUSE they are wild, woolly and “serene.” They don’t have to get up every morning and go to work so they don’t care about the road conditions. They can also keep freezers full of venison and buffalo in their garages and survive a l-o-o-o-ng time, with occasional trips to the local A&G Food Mart and diner or truck stop to have coffee with their friends (when the roads are clear).

[bearishgurl]

I don’t understand the demographic shortages in those New England states so much because I haven’t been there.

I HAVE been to Wyoming a few times, however, and it was all I could do to keep my scarf on my head and my hand on the gas pump – in the middle of Rock Springs in the SUMMER. The wind there blows s-o-o-o hard. The two-lane state hwys are open 2-3 mos. year. If you are on one of them, don’t be in a hurry. You may have to wait for than 20 mins. for an entire herd of sheep, buffalo or cattle to mosey across. They have the right-of-way.

I recommend traveling with wool blankets, flashlights, flares, batt charger, down sleeping bags, etc. during the winter, as well as a CB antenna. If you find yourself in the unfortunate position to be driving I-80 thru there in the dead of winter, the MOST IMPORTANT RULE you MUST adhere to is . . . Whoever is biggest WINS, period. Those triple tractor-trailers roaring thru there have chains on at least 20 out of their 26+ wheels and when they come up behind or alongside your passenger vehicle, pull WAY OVER on the shoulder and let them HAVE THEIR WAY! Use your rug, rock salt/sand and shovel (and your passengers pushing) to get your veh. back onto the road. You won’t sink in a ditch because the snow is compacted and piled up to 25 feet high on the sides of the road by plows, propped up by several rows of 10′ high “snow-fences” (to keep the wild goat and bighorn sheep off the road).

Just one single loose chain flying off those trucks could hit your veh. windows and kill you or one or more of your passengers. Just ONE granny gear slipping or brake failure and . . . your veh. is HISTORY (as well as everyone inside). STAY AWAY!! 2nd RULE, if you can no longer SEE see the difference bet. your veh, the road and the sky, exit the hwy as soon as you see some civilization. Don’t expect your cell phone to work everywhere. Tune your CB radio to the hwy patrol-band. Have your passenger(s) looking for you b/c the road signs will be covered with snow. Do not be picky – there are no Sheraton’s around there. Check into a no-tell motel and wait out the storm. Follow a plow back up the hwy ramp the next morning.

Now, if you were a kid attending Wyoming’s ONE big university in Laramie ONLY because it was “in-state,” how fast do you think it would take you to leave the state upon graduating with a degree?? It’s a different life there, IMO, certainly not for the faint of heart.

Sr. citizens are drawn to WY, MT and NM BECAUSE they are wild, woolly and “serene.” They don’t have to get up every morning and go to work so they don’t care about the road conditions. They can also keep freezers full of venison and buffalo in their garages and survive a l-o-o-o-ng time, with occasional trips to the local A&G Food Mart and diner or truck stop to have coffee with their friends (when the roads are clear).

[bearishgurl]

I don’t understand the demographic shortages in those New England states so much because I haven’t been there.

I HAVE been to Wyoming a few times, however, and it was all I could do to keep my scarf on my head and my hand on the gas pump – in the middle of Rock Springs in the SUMMER. The wind there blows s-o-o-o hard. The two-lane state hwys are open 2-3 mos. year. If you are on one of them, don’t be in a hurry. You may have to wait for than 20 mins. for an entire herd of sheep, buffalo or cattle to mosey across. They have the right-of-way.

I recommend traveling with wool blankets, flashlights, flares, batt charger, down sleeping bags, etc. during the winter, as well as a CB antenna. If you find yourself in the unfortunate position to be driving I-80 thru there in the dead of winter, the MOST IMPORTANT RULE you MUST adhere to is . . . Whoever is biggest WINS, period. Those triple tractor-trailers roaring thru there have chains on at least 20 out of their 26+ wheels and when they come up behind or alongside your passenger vehicle, pull WAY OVER on the shoulder and let them HAVE THEIR WAY! Use your rug, rock salt/sand and shovel (and your passengers pushing) to get your veh. back onto the road. You won’t sink in a ditch because the snow is compacted and piled up to 25 feet high on the sides of the road by plows, propped up by several rows of 10′ high “snow-fences” (to keep the wild goat and bighorn sheep off the road).

Just one single loose chain flying off those trucks could hit your veh. windows and kill you or one or more of your passengers. Just ONE granny gear slipping or brake failure and . . . your veh. is HISTORY (as well as everyone inside). STAY AWAY!! 2nd RULE, if you can no longer SEE see the difference bet. your veh, the road and the sky, exit the hwy as soon as you see some civilization. Don’t expect your cell phone to work everywhere. Tune your CB radio to the hwy patrol-band. Have your passenger(s) looking for you b/c the road signs will be covered with snow. Do not be picky – there are no Sheraton’s around there. Check into a no-tell motel and wait out the storm. Follow a plow back up the hwy ramp the next morning.

Now, if you were a kid attending Wyoming’s ONE big university in Laramie ONLY because it was “in-state,” how fast do you think it would take you to leave the state upon graduating with a degree?? It’s a different life there, IMO, certainly not for the faint of heart.

Sr. citizens are drawn to WY, MT and NM BECAUSE they are wild, woolly and “serene.” They don’t have to get up every morning and go to work so they don’t care about the road conditions. They can also keep freezers full of venison and buffalo in their garages and survive a l-o-o-o-ng time, with occasional trips to the local A&G Food Mart and diner or truck stop to have coffee with their friends (when the roads are clear).

[bearishgurl]

[quote=qwerty007]Murf, here’s the worked example:

Property purchased for $100,000
Property worth when repaired $145,000
Repairs needed on the property $ 15,000
Loan amount would be 65% of $145,000 or $ 94,250

The borrower is also charged points and fees to close the loan. These fees,
along with the down payment, make sure the borrower has “skin in the game.”

The property was purchased at $100k, and the loan was for $94,250. The skin is $5,750 plus fees etc. Appraised value is unrealized gain, and not skin in the game. It’s a slight of hand.[/quote]

querty, you gotta really have A LOT of confidence in this flipper to invest in him, IMO. Hopefully, he is a licensed general contractor who gets industry discounts and favorable payback terms on mat’ls. If he is, then why does he need to borrow the fix-up $$, too?? I could see him taking out 2-3 hard-money purchase loans to buy trustees deeds within days/weeks of one another but I cannot see him borrowing the fix-up $$ also. Not at those prices.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=qwerty007]Murf, here’s the worked example:

Property purchased for $100,000
Property worth when repaired $145,000
Repairs needed on the property $ 15,000
Loan amount would be 65% of $145,000 or $ 94,250

The borrower is also charged points and fees to close the loan. These fees,
along with the down payment, make sure the borrower has “skin in the game.”

The property was purchased at $100k, and the loan was for $94,250. The skin is $5,750 plus fees etc. Appraised value is unrealized gain, and not skin in the game. It’s a slight of hand.[/quote]

querty, you gotta really have A LOT of confidence in this flipper to invest in him, IMO. Hopefully, he is a licensed general contractor who gets industry discounts and favorable payback terms on mat’ls. If he is, then why does he need to borrow the fix-up $$, too?? I could see him taking out 2-3 hard-money purchase loans to buy trustees deeds within days/weeks of one another but I cannot see him borrowing the fix-up $$ also. Not at those prices.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=qwerty007]Murf, here’s the worked example:

Property purchased for $100,000
Property worth when repaired $145,000
Repairs needed on the property $ 15,000
Loan amount would be 65% of $145,000 or $ 94,250

The borrower is also charged points and fees to close the loan. These fees,
along with the down payment, make sure the borrower has “skin in the game.”

The property was purchased at $100k, and the loan was for $94,250. The skin is $5,750 plus fees etc. Appraised value is unrealized gain, and not skin in the game. It’s a slight of hand.[/quote]

querty, you gotta really have A LOT of confidence in this flipper to invest in him, IMO. Hopefully, he is a licensed general contractor who gets industry discounts and favorable payback terms on mat’ls. If he is, then why does he need to borrow the fix-up $$, too?? I could see him taking out 2-3 hard-money purchase loans to buy trustees deeds within days/weeks of one another but I cannot see him borrowing the fix-up $$ also. Not at those prices.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=qwerty007]Murf, here’s the worked example:

Property purchased for $100,000
Property worth when repaired $145,000
Repairs needed on the property $ 15,000
Loan amount would be 65% of $145,000 or $ 94,250

The borrower is also charged points and fees to close the loan. These fees,
along with the down payment, make sure the borrower has “skin in the game.”

The property was purchased at $100k, and the loan was for $94,250. The skin is $5,750 plus fees etc. Appraised value is unrealized gain, and not skin in the game. It’s a slight of hand.[/quote]

querty, you gotta really have A LOT of confidence in this flipper to invest in him, IMO. Hopefully, he is a licensed general contractor who gets industry discounts and favorable payback terms on mat’ls. If he is, then why does he need to borrow the fix-up $$, too?? I could see him taking out 2-3 hard-money purchase loans to buy trustees deeds within days/weeks of one another but I cannot see him borrowing the fix-up $$ also. Not at those prices.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=qwerty007]Murf, here’s the worked example:

Property purchased for $100,000
Property worth when repaired $145,000
Repairs needed on the property $ 15,000
Loan amount would be 65% of $145,000 or $ 94,250

The borrower is also charged points and fees to close the loan. These fees,
along with the down payment, make sure the borrower has “skin in the game.”

The property was purchased at $100k, and the loan was for $94,250. The skin is $5,750 plus fees etc. Appraised value is unrealized gain, and not skin in the game. It’s a slight of hand.[/quote]

querty, you gotta really have A LOT of confidence in this flipper to invest in him, IMO. Hopefully, he is a licensed general contractor who gets industry discounts and favorable payback terms on mat’ls. If he is, then why does he need to borrow the fix-up $$, too?? I could see him taking out 2-3 hard-money purchase loans to buy trustees deeds within days/weeks of one another but I cannot see him borrowing the fix-up $$ also. Not at those prices.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=CA renter]Too many agents think they’re the ones who should control the transaction. Not in my book. The party bringing the money to the table is the one whose interests need to be protected. If more buyers had the cojones to stand up for what’s right and not play along with all the agents’ and sellers’ games, perhaps we wouldn’t have had a housing bubble (or at least it wouldn’t have been so bad).[/quote]
(emphasis added)

CAR, I have already posted about this topic ad nauseum on pgs. 4-5 of this thread.

http://piggington.com/buying_a_house_at_the_new_top_of_the_market

It is actually the buyer’s AGENT that needs the cajones to “protect the interests” of their clients. It is actually the buyers’ AGENTS who are currently cooperating with and condoning all these *games* sellers play (and get away with, more often than not). The BUYERS’ AGENTS ARE THE ONES THAT NEED TO TAKE BACK CONTROL to facilitate the market returning to a more level playing field.

[quote=CA Renter]OTOH, I really do feel badly for agents who show clients 40 houses, then have the buyer go with another agent. For this reason, there should be “menu pricing” where a buyer can pay for individual services (like unlocking/showing a house, writing up a contract, ordering reports, etc.) as opposed to the agent being paid by commission only. What’s funny is that most agents will fight this tooth and nail, but then complain about the “unreasonable” buyers.[/quote]

CAR, I don’t think buyers should have to pay anything to an agent. All the commission should be paid by the seller, who will be reaping the proceeds from the sale. The only exception to this *rule* is if a buyer has hired a “relo agent” to find them suitable property to fly out and look at and has given them the exact specifications they are looking for in a property. The buyer in this case would be located out of town and the agent locally tied to the area the buyer was shopping in.

If this case, the buyer would sign a contract with the relo agent who would receive a finder’s fee for each property they showed the buyer which met all of their specifications but which the buyer did not place an offer on. If a serious offer (not drastically lowball unless the prop. warrants this) is placed by that agent on behalf of that buyer, then the normal agency agreement would apply for a commission instead of the finders fee. This keeps the buyer from flying out to view properties which are unsuitable and keeps the agent looking out for a buyer’s best interest who is not even in the local area yet or who may not even possibly end up moving. The reason I made mention of “lowball” offers is because many transferring employees from other states are SHOCKED at what they can buy here when they actually VIEW properties in person in their price range. They immediately make a comparison to what their families are already living in, in say, Houston and decide not to take the transfer, after all. In this case, the agent needs to protect their many hours of work. Sure, you and I can look at properties in Denver on the internet but we can’t tell SO MANY THINGS from that description and those photos. There’s nothing like being there in person!

Many discount brokers already have piecemeal pricing as you describe in place for SELLERS but I do not believe these services are a good idea for most sellers. They are okay for sophisticated and repeat sellers who know how to perform many selling functions by themselves properly, such as staging, showing and qualifying the persons their property is shown to. These sellers are far and few between and the rest of the sellers need an agent that will TAKE CONTROL of all aspects their listing and run with it and deserve every penny of their full commission upon a bona-fide sale.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=CA renter]Too many agents think they’re the ones who should control the transaction. Not in my book. The party bringing the money to the table is the one whose interests need to be protected. If more buyers had the cojones to stand up for what’s right and not play along with all the agents’ and sellers’ games, perhaps we wouldn’t have had a housing bubble (or at least it wouldn’t have been so bad).[/quote]
(emphasis added)

CAR, I have already posted about this topic ad nauseum on pgs. 4-5 of this thread.

http://piggington.com/buying_a_house_at_the_new_top_of_the_market

It is actually the buyer’s AGENT that needs the cajones to “protect the interests” of their clients. It is actually the buyers’ AGENTS who are currently cooperating with and condoning all these *games* sellers play (and get away with, more often than not). The BUYERS’ AGENTS ARE THE ONES THAT NEED TO TAKE BACK CONTROL to facilitate the market returning to a more level playing field.

[quote=CA Renter]OTOH, I really do feel badly for agents who show clients 40 houses, then have the buyer go with another agent. For this reason, there should be “menu pricing” where a buyer can pay for individual services (like unlocking/showing a house, writing up a contract, ordering reports, etc.) as opposed to the agent being paid by commission only. What’s funny is that most agents will fight this tooth and nail, but then complain about the “unreasonable” buyers.[/quote]

CAR, I don’t think buyers should have to pay anything to an agent. All the commission should be paid by the seller, who will be reaping the proceeds from the sale. The only exception to this *rule* is if a buyer has hired a “relo agent” to find them suitable property to fly out and look at and has given them the exact specifications they are looking for in a property. The buyer in this case would be located out of town and the agent locally tied to the area the buyer was shopping in.

If this case, the buyer would sign a contract with the relo agent who would receive a finder’s fee for each property they showed the buyer which met all of their specifications but which the buyer did not place an offer on. If a serious offer (not drastically lowball unless the prop. warrants this) is placed by that agent on behalf of that buyer, then the normal agency agreement would apply for a commission instead of the finders fee. This keeps the buyer from flying out to view properties which are unsuitable and keeps the agent looking out for a buyer’s best interest who is not even in the local area yet or who may not even possibly end up moving. The reason I made mention of “lowball” offers is because many transferring employees from other states are SHOCKED at what they can buy here when they actually VIEW properties in person in their price range. They immediately make a comparison to what their families are already living in, in say, Houston and decide not to take the transfer, after all. In this case, the agent needs to protect their many hours of work. Sure, you and I can look at properties in Denver on the internet but we can’t tell SO MANY THINGS from that description and those photos. There’s nothing like being there in person!

Many discount brokers already have piecemeal pricing as you describe in place for SELLERS but I do not believe these services are a good idea for most sellers. They are okay for sophisticated and repeat sellers who know how to perform many selling functions by themselves properly, such as staging, showing and qualifying the persons their property is shown to. These sellers are far and few between and the rest of the sellers need an agent that will TAKE CONTROL of all aspects their listing and run with it and deserve every penny of their full commission upon a bona-fide sale.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=CA renter]Too many agents think they’re the ones who should control the transaction. Not in my book. The party bringing the money to the table is the one whose interests need to be protected. If more buyers had the cojones to stand up for what’s right and not play along with all the agents’ and sellers’ games, perhaps we wouldn’t have had a housing bubble (or at least it wouldn’t have been so bad).[/quote]
(emphasis added)

CAR, I have already posted about this topic ad nauseum on pgs. 4-5 of this thread.

http://piggington.com/buying_a_house_at_the_new_top_of_the_market

It is actually the buyer’s AGENT that needs the cajones to “protect the interests” of their clients. It is actually the buyers’ AGENTS who are currently cooperating with and condoning all these *games* sellers play (and get away with, more often than not). The BUYERS’ AGENTS ARE THE ONES THAT NEED TO TAKE BACK CONTROL to facilitate the market returning to a more level playing field.

[quote=CA Renter]OTOH, I really do feel badly for agents who show clients 40 houses, then have the buyer go with another agent. For this reason, there should be “menu pricing” where a buyer can pay for individual services (like unlocking/showing a house, writing up a contract, ordering reports, etc.) as opposed to the agent being paid by commission only. What’s funny is that most agents will fight this tooth and nail, but then complain about the “unreasonable” buyers.[/quote]

CAR, I don’t think buyers should have to pay anything to an agent. All the commission should be paid by the seller, who will be reaping the proceeds from the sale. The only exception to this *rule* is if a buyer has hired a “relo agent” to find them suitable property to fly out and look at and has given them the exact specifications they are looking for in a property. The buyer in this case would be located out of town and the agent locally tied to the area the buyer was shopping in.

If this case, the buyer would sign a contract with the relo agent who would receive a finder’s fee for each property they showed the buyer which met all of their specifications but which the buyer did not place an offer on. If a serious offer (not drastically lowball unless the prop. warrants this) is placed by that agent on behalf of that buyer, then the normal agency agreement would apply for a commission instead of the finders fee. This keeps the buyer from flying out to view properties which are unsuitable and keeps the agent looking out for a buyer’s best interest who is not even in the local area yet or who may not even possibly end up moving. The reason I made mention of “lowball” offers is because many transferring employees from other states are SHOCKED at what they can buy here when they actually VIEW properties in person in their price range. They immediately make a comparison to what their families are already living in, in say, Houston and decide not to take the transfer, after all. In this case, the agent needs to protect their many hours of work. Sure, you and I can look at properties in Denver on the internet but we can’t tell SO MANY THINGS from that description and those photos. There’s nothing like being there in person!

Many discount brokers already have piecemeal pricing as you describe in place for SELLERS but I do not believe these services are a good idea for most sellers. They are okay for sophisticated and repeat sellers who know how to perform many selling functions by themselves properly, such as staging, showing and qualifying the persons their property is shown to. These sellers are far and few between and the rest of the sellers need an agent that will TAKE CONTROL of all aspects their listing and run with it and deserve every penny of their full commission upon a bona-fide sale.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=CA renter]Too many agents think they’re the ones who should control the transaction. Not in my book. The party bringing the money to the table is the one whose interests need to be protected. If more buyers had the cojones to stand up for what’s right and not play along with all the agents’ and sellers’ games, perhaps we wouldn’t have had a housing bubble (or at least it wouldn’t have been so bad).[/quote]
(emphasis added)

CAR, I have already posted about this topic ad nauseum on pgs. 4-5 of this thread.

http://piggington.com/buying_a_house_at_the_new_top_of_the_market

It is actually the buyer’s AGENT that needs the cajones to “protect the interests” of their clients. It is actually the buyers’ AGENTS who are currently cooperating with and condoning all these *games* sellers play (and get away with, more often than not). The BUYERS’ AGENTS ARE THE ONES THAT NEED TO TAKE BACK CONTROL to facilitate the market returning to a more level playing field.

[quote=CA Renter]OTOH, I really do feel badly for agents who show clients 40 houses, then have the buyer go with another agent. For this reason, there should be “menu pricing” where a buyer can pay for individual services (like unlocking/showing a house, writing up a contract, ordering reports, etc.) as opposed to the agent being paid by commission only. What’s funny is that most agents will fight this tooth and nail, but then complain about the “unreasonable” buyers.[/quote]

CAR, I don’t think buyers should have to pay anything to an agent. All the commission should be paid by the seller, who will be reaping the proceeds from the sale. The only exception to this *rule* is if a buyer has hired a “relo agent” to find them suitable property to fly out and look at and has given them the exact specifications they are looking for in a property. The buyer in this case would be located out of town and the agent locally tied to the area the buyer was shopping in.

If this case, the buyer would sign a contract with the relo agent who would receive a finder’s fee for each property they showed the buyer which met all of their specifications but which the buyer did not place an offer on. If a serious offer (not drastically lowball unless the prop. warrants this) is placed by that agent on behalf of that buyer, then the normal agency agreement would apply for a commission instead of the finders fee. This keeps the buyer from flying out to view properties which are unsuitable and keeps the agent looking out for a buyer’s best interest who is not even in the local area yet or who may not even possibly end up moving. The reason I made mention of “lowball” offers is because many transferring employees from other states are SHOCKED at what they can buy here when they actually VIEW properties in person in their price range. They immediately make a comparison to what their families are already living in, in say, Houston and decide not to take the transfer, after all. In this case, the agent needs to protect their many hours of work. Sure, you and I can look at properties in Denver on the internet but we can’t tell SO MANY THINGS from that description and those photos. There’s nothing like being there in person!

Many discount brokers already have piecemeal pricing as you describe in place for SELLERS but I do not believe these services are a good idea for most sellers. They are okay for sophisticated and repeat sellers who know how to perform many selling functions by themselves properly, such as staging, showing and qualifying the persons their property is shown to. These sellers are far and few between and the rest of the sellers need an agent that will TAKE CONTROL of all aspects their listing and run with it and deserve every penny of their full commission upon a bona-fide sale.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=CA renter]Too many agents think they’re the ones who should control the transaction. Not in my book. The party bringing the money to the table is the one whose interests need to be protected. If more buyers had the cojones to stand up for what’s right and not play along with all the agents’ and sellers’ games, perhaps we wouldn’t have had a housing bubble (or at least it wouldn’t have been so bad).[/quote]
(emphasis added)

CAR, I have already posted about this topic ad nauseum on pgs. 4-5 of this thread.

http://piggington.com/buying_a_house_at_the_new_top_of_the_market

It is actually the buyer’s AGENT that needs the cajones to “protect the interests” of their clients. It is actually the buyers’ AGENTS who are currently cooperating with and condoning all these *games* sellers play (and get away with, more often than not). The BUYERS’ AGENTS ARE THE ONES THAT NEED TO TAKE BACK CONTROL to facilitate the market returning to a more level playing field.

[quote=CA Renter]OTOH, I really do feel badly for agents who show clients 40 houses, then have the buyer go with another agent. For this reason, there should be “menu pricing” where a buyer can pay for individual services (like unlocking/showing a house, writing up a contract, ordering reports, etc.) as opposed to the agent being paid by commission only. What’s funny is that most agents will fight this tooth and nail, but then complain about the “unreasonable” buyers.[/quote]

CAR, I don’t think buyers should have to pay anything to an agent. All the commission should be paid by the seller, who will be reaping the proceeds from the sale. The only exception to this *rule* is if a buyer has hired a “relo agent” to find them suitable property to fly out and look at and has given them the exact specifications they are looking for in a property. The buyer in this case would be located out of town and the agent locally tied to the area the buyer was shopping in.

If this case, the buyer would sign a contract with the relo agent who would receive a finder’s fee for each property they showed the buyer which met all of their specifications but which the buyer did not place an offer on. If a serious offer (not drastically lowball unless the prop. warrants this) is placed by that agent on behalf of that buyer, then the normal agency agreement would apply for a commission instead of the finders fee. This keeps the buyer from flying out to view properties which are unsuitable and keeps the agent looking out for a buyer’s best interest who is not even in the local area yet or who may not even possibly end up moving. The reason I made mention of “lowball” offers is because many transferring employees from other states are SHOCKED at what they can buy here when they actually VIEW properties in person in their price range. They immediately make a comparison to what their families are already living in, in say, Houston and decide not to take the transfer, after all. In this case, the agent needs to protect their many hours of work. Sure, you and I can look at properties in Denver on the internet but we can’t tell SO MANY THINGS from that description and those photos. There’s nothing like being there in person!

Many discount brokers already have piecemeal pricing as you describe in place for SELLERS but I do not believe these services are a good idea for most sellers. They are okay for sophisticated and repeat sellers who know how to perform many selling functions by themselves properly, such as staging, showing and qualifying the persons their property is shown to. These sellers are far and few between and the rest of the sellers need an agent that will TAKE CONTROL of all aspects their listing and run with it and deserve every penny of their full commission upon a bona-fide sale.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdrealtor]JP etal,
Client control does not pertain to what or whether they should buy but rather their performance according to the terms of the legal agreement they have signed once a legal agreement has been reached.[/quote]

I agree with this, sdr, and by the same token, with buyers, the Buyer-Broker Agency Agreement will be the first “legal” agreement they enter into with me because it will be executed before I do any business with buyers.

Buyers quickly become “mesmerized” by “cosmetic enhancements” and I have saved more than a few of them from making a bad purchase mistake that would be difficult to recover from because I remembered something terribly wrong with that address, block or complex from back in ’92 or ’87 (or whenever) and complete an up-to-date due diligence on it for my buyer. Most of this stuff is typically NOT disclosed by the current seller, whether they knew about it themselves or not. Any other agent would have just let them purchase and collect the commission. Look at all the recent agents that put their buyers in “exploding loans” just to make a commission! Most per probably so ignorant, they didn’t even understand the loans themselves.

A relatively-new (lic. under ten yrs.) agent can’t possibly know that certain corner or side of a particular block all had cracked slabs at one time, an entire family was murdered in a property, a Shell pipeline runs under that street or that septic tank hasn’t worked property in x years and needs to be dug out unless you have specialized area-experience and a memory like a clock to go along with the exp. I have been in so many addresses at one time or the other, I can remember things about a particular property once I come back to it, even if the property looks entirely different now. An agent can’t “buy” this experience or learn it it class and the beauty of this is that it is all in my head (except for my actual full-size and letter-size plat map archives) which come in VERY HANDY at times – LOL!

[side rant] I’m a firm believer that agents should only stick to areas they are intimately familiar with and farm out clients to other agents for a “referral fee” upon close of escrow. For instance, in the past, I have “farmed out” buyer-clients who wanted to shop in PQ to an agent I personally knew who grew up and worked in PQ as I would be doing a disservice to those clients stumbling around those sts. on their “behalf” with a Thomas Guide, not being familiar with the the tracts and floor plans, etc. I also never wanted waste a lot of time and gas driving up and down the fwy long distances to do business. In other words, if an agent doesn’t know who owns that corner store or what the names of their watchdog and son who works the late shift are, they have no business working in that ‘hood, because there are plenty of agents who do. I believe a tract-area agent should be able to picture a certain street in their minds, note what business is on the corner, if any, yr. of construction, types of roofs, recent complete remodels, name of builder and no. of floorplans, which are prem. lots, which sides of the st face upslope/downslope, etc. ALL FROM LYING ON THE COUCH OR ON A TOWEL AT THE BEACH. If they can’t do this, they don’t have enough inventory knowledge and experience in their area of specialty to be “practicing” in it and should become an assistant to or work under an agent or “Broker-Salesperson” that does, in order to get that experience. [end of side-rant]

Yes, I believe, with first-time buyers and sellers especially, the agent needs to have a firm control of their clients and all aspects of the showings and escrow. Many, many sellers DO NOT understand that they will need to change the way they live while their properties are marketed in competition with cleaned and repaired bank-owned properties. This “control” keeps the agent from “spinning their wheels” and wasting a lot of time with unmotivated principals.

Sure, a buyer can choose between a “cute” 20 or 30-something miniskirt or get me, for the same commission arrangement which doesn’t require they pay anything out-of-pocket. But if my license was activated at this time, my services would come with a 90-day Buyer-Broker Agency Agreement chained to their ankle. It’s a free country. Take your pick.

Oh, and BTW, I DO have some short skirts that still look great on me, but haven’t worn them in years :}

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdrealtor]JP etal,
Client control does not pertain to what or whether they should buy but rather their performance according to the terms of the legal agreement they have signed once a legal agreement has been reached.[/quote]

I agree with this, sdr, and by the same token, with buyers, the Buyer-Broker Agency Agreement will be the first “legal” agreement they enter into with me because it will be executed before I do any business with buyers.

Buyers quickly become “mesmerized” by “cosmetic enhancements” and I have saved more than a few of them from making a bad purchase mistake that would be difficult to recover from because I remembered something terribly wrong with that address, block or complex from back in ’92 or ’87 (or whenever) and complete an up-to-date due diligence on it for my buyer. Most of this stuff is typically NOT disclosed by the current seller, whether they knew about it themselves or not. Any other agent would have just let them purchase and collect the commission. Look at all the recent agents that put their buyers in “exploding loans” just to make a commission! Most per probably so ignorant, they didn’t even understand the loans themselves.

A relatively-new (lic. under ten yrs.) agent can’t possibly know that certain corner or side of a particular block all had cracked slabs at one time, an entire family was murdered in a property, a Shell pipeline runs under that street or that septic tank hasn’t worked property in x years and needs to be dug out unless you have specialized area-experience and a memory like a clock to go along with the exp. I have been in so many addresses at one time or the other, I can remember things about a particular property once I come back to it, even if the property looks entirely different now. An agent can’t “buy” this experience or learn it it class and the beauty of this is that it is all in my head (except for my actual full-size and letter-size plat map archives) which come in VERY HANDY at times – LOL!

[side rant] I’m a firm believer that agents should only stick to areas they are intimately familiar with and farm out clients to other agents for a “referral fee” upon close of escrow. For instance, in the past, I have “farmed out” buyer-clients who wanted to shop in PQ to an agent I personally knew who grew up and worked in PQ as I would be doing a disservice to those clients stumbling around those sts. on their “behalf” with a Thomas Guide, not being familiar with the the tracts and floor plans, etc. I also never wanted waste a lot of time and gas driving up and down the fwy long distances to do business. In other words, if an agent doesn’t know who owns that corner store or what the names of their watchdog and son who works the late shift are, they have no business working in that ‘hood, because there are plenty of agents who do. I believe a tract-area agent should be able to picture a certain street in their minds, note what business is on the corner, if any, yr. of construction, types of roofs, recent complete remodels, name of builder and no. of floorplans, which are prem. lots, which sides of the st face upslope/downslope, etc. ALL FROM LYING ON THE COUCH OR ON A TOWEL AT THE BEACH. If they can’t do this, they don’t have enough inventory knowledge and experience in their area of specialty to be “practicing” in it and should become an assistant to or work under an agent or “Broker-Salesperson” that does, in order to get that experience. [end of side-rant]

Yes, I believe, with first-time buyers and sellers especially, the agent needs to have a firm control of their clients and all aspects of the showings and escrow. Many, many sellers DO NOT understand that they will need to change the way they live while their properties are marketed in competition with cleaned and repaired bank-owned properties. This “control” keeps the agent from “spinning their wheels” and wasting a lot of time with unmotivated principals.

Sure, a buyer can choose between a “cute” 20 or 30-something miniskirt or get me, for the same commission arrangement which doesn’t require they pay anything out-of-pocket. But if my license was activated at this time, my services would come with a 90-day Buyer-Broker Agency Agreement chained to their ankle. It’s a free country. Take your pick.

Oh, and BTW, I DO have some short skirts that still look great on me, but haven’t worn them in years :}

[Author]

Posts