Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Realtors Under Fire

Recs

2

April 11, 2007 – Comments (2)

Original here.

Spicy nuglet:

It's nice to see the New York Times (NYSE: NYT) step up and give the National Association of Realtors, and its head optimist, David Lereah, a poke it so richly deserves. This article points out what the NAR, and homebuilders like Centex (NYSE: CTX), Beazer (NYSE: BZH), and Pulte (NYSE: PHM) or mortgage-hawkers like Washington Mutual (NYSE: WM) and Freddie Mac (NYSE: FRE) don't want you to know.

Renting makes a lot more sense than buying. In a lot of places. A lot of the time. Do the numbers yourself.

It's still a bit of New York Times naive, brimming with statements like this one: "Most striking, perhaps, is the fact that prices may not yet have fallen far enough for buying to look better than renting today..."

How is that striking? Home prices have gone through an unprecedented bubble. Rents have not. Unless housing prices tumble very quickly, it will be years before buying is smarter than renting, especially in a bizarre market like the one around Washington D.C., where a run-down, seven-square-foot, 1950s crackerbox goes for $450,000...

2 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On April 12, 2007 at 4:37 PM, formerre (< 20) wrote:

Realtors are MUCH to blame on a lot of this.  Having been in the industry of new home sales; I have seen a LOT of Realtors who refuse to bring their client out to see your homes unless you pay THEM at a minimum 5% on a new home.

I saw where some of the large builders built sweetheart deals to pay 7% commissions on 'regular' Realtors.  Now many areas have high foreclosure rates, but the builder and Realtor are LONG gone and have wiped their hands on the transaction.

Who pays for these 5-7% - the buyer.  But they are represented by those few 'Professionals' that 'have their best interest at heart' - when they really had their pocket book in mind.  I am sure many of those did not disclose that they could have bought more home down the street for less money and as good or better quality.

 

Report this comment
#2) On April 12, 2007 at 6:18 PM, TMFBent (99.81) wrote:

I have known some good RE agents. But even then, I sold my last place FSBO. Local law firm provided us GREAT service, did the closing without us, and I believe I paid a grand total of $500 for their work.

Under most circumstances, I see absolutely no need for a RE agent. If you need help with neighborhoods in a new place and you're a buyer, then by all means. But as a seller, I'd take my chances on my own first any day. (Unless money was not an issue.) 

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement