So it occurred to me that NAR is SUPOSSED to be all about ethics. Has NAR even once conducted an internal investigation to see if in fact that buyers agents show all available listings regardless of the commission being offered?

NOT LIKELY!! Obviously NAR has their little dark secrets that they don't want to expose within the REALTOR community!!

Really sad.

Oh goodness. Not another NAR battle. If you want them to do an internal audit, ask them. I'm tired of people complaining, but not doing anything.

I send emails and call organizations when I have a complaint. I don't just sit on my hind legs and complain in an internet forum. Get up and do something that matters for a change.

How about this... I'll help you brainstorm: Organize an email campaign and let us know what we can do to help.

The point I am making is that you have agents out there (and here obvioulsy by the posts) that CLEARLY violate the code of ethics (by stating agents won't show homes that are advertised with a sub standard commission).

It is obviously NOT in the best interest of the buyer to ONLY see the homes that benefit the agents bottom line. So the issues is not whether it happens it is why ISN'T NAR doing anything about it. NAR prides itself on a foundation of ethics but does absolutely nothing about obvious abuses by REALTORS!!!!!

It's pathetic! and if NAR actually did do something two things might happen 1. NAR would realize (and EXPOSE) their 1million agents have a lot of dirty little ethical secrets in there midst 2. Actually start something that would help eliminate the USED car salesman image of the REALTOR.

The TRUTH IS!!! NAR is more concerned with selling you 55.00 classes and 399.00 silly designations.

Rick,

Who do you work for? Are you a Realtor?

Rick you continuously make negative posts. I see you have a serious problem.
If a Realtor has a EBA with his client and the client chooses to not see discount homes because the client does not want to pay the extra fee that is 100% ethical and fine. The dirty secret is that discount agents do not tell thier clients that they will get less showings by not offering a competitive commission to other agents. I have seen a discount models in my area have the home expire after 6 months. If you only sell 5% a month of your listings that may be 60% a year. Traditional models sell 95% a year and at a much faster rate.
Rick eat more rabbit pills. Let us know when you get a license? If you where a agent and not just a disgruntled individual we might actually value your comments. Most here percieve you as a nut.

Greg, bad link.

I don't think so Rick, it's against the COE and agents like to get paid for their work.
However, if a seller does not offer sufficient compensation to a buyers agent and the buyer can't pay their agent, what do you think will happen? They move on to the next property where the agent can get paid.
FYI, NAR has no regulatory jurisdiction over agents, only the licensing agencies do.

Rick,
Lame as ever and wrong as usual! What we have come to expect of you.

It is not illegal or unethical with an EBA or proper disclosure, these fact which you so obviously overlook or should I say prefer not to see.

Whats wrong Rick? Agents not showing your discount listings? Did you ever buy that franchise? Do you actually still function as an agent? It is funny that you always claim that the traditional brokers are attacking the discounters, from your posts it is you the discounter that is attacking the traditional brokers...

Rick -
I looked at your bio - an "agent" huh -
Not a REALTOR?
To me that is like going to a OBGYN for a heart transplant -

Rick -
Another note, if you were a REALTOR and you believe that there was a violation, then you could file a complaint with your local board.
I am on my local board Grievance Committee and have been a REALTOR for 11+ years. I have found the only reason someone doesn’t want to be a REALTOR is to avoid being Ethical -

Salem, I have known more Realtors who where unethical than agents who didn't pay the 400-600 bucks for stupid pin.

Now as far as the OGBYN comment, I cringe to thing you don't have enough common sense to make a better comparason between professions.

NOW, back to the topic. I understand completely about the Buyer Broker Agreement and if the buyer understands that they may not see every home based on the agents bottom line and is completely not in there best interest, that is fine.

BUT!!! the point is there are a lot of agents out there doing just that, only showing certain homes without a BBroker Agmt. THIS FOLKS IS UNETHICAL and NAR TURNS A BLIND EYE!!! more like having a black eye if you ask me.

Care to post some actual stats to back up your comment? I mean you make these huge generalizations with no factual basis.

With an EBA a buyer is saying they will pay X% to the buyer broker, usually w/something along these terms... Buyer agrees to pay X% regardless of co-op offered, and/or Buyer will pay the difference of co-op fee to equal X%. And sometimes it's an hourly rate, or a flat fee, not a %. And the EBAs, at least the ones we use say that any and all listings in the MLS that fit the buyers' criteria & price range will be shown, as well as FSBOs. Wow. Yeah. Totally sounds unethical to me, really. :rolleyes:

All whine and no action. I think I'll just block him since he has nothing to offer. If he's an agent, let's see the license number. Otherwise, there HAS to be something better for him to do.

You seem really focused on NAR, but aren't doing anything except complaining. Maybe you can relieve some stress by volunteering at a local community group. Seriously.

Rick is just a loser and shows his ignorance with his every post. His only topics are how bad NAR is and how non-discount agents overcharge their clients. His first posts made it sound like he was an A2S broker but then it was he was going to purchase one and now 8 months later no word on that franchise purchase. He is most likely such a loser he cannot afford the paltry $19,500 franchise fee or worse yet they turned him down!

Well, ok.. You guys just keep your head in the sand. I am glad I made my point because there are always a few I get through to.

The only point you have made is that you do not know what you are talking about!

I always try to be positive, but am just fed up. I like taking action when something bothers me. I've been in management for a long time and didn't tolerate complaints without resolutions.

Inaction when an employee or member is dissatisfied means they can 1) leave or 2) stop complaining. Solve the problem or you are the problem.

Part of solving a problem is open the eyes of the people who are completely unaware they are being taken advantage of.

I see most of you prefer to walk around completely blind...

Good Luck....

Rick -
I have found when a “discount broker” who consistently lists at a “discount”, they are the first to scream when they are representing a Buyer and the home their Buyer wants happens to have a lesser commission.
When I list I put the minimal commission down with a comment in the private remarks stating to call Listing Broker for commission. When a Broker calls and asks about the commission amount I then know if they are a “Discounter”. If they are then my response is “yep, that is what it is”. If the Broker calling is NOT a “Discounter”, then I will tell them that I will increase the Selling side commission to _%. That way the “Discounter” is getting what he / she is use to earning.
You know the saying: You get what you pay for -
As a Listing Broker I earn every dollar! When I represent a Seller and something has to give, I am the one giving to assure that the Buyer Broker is receiving their pay. I know they work just as hard as a Listing Broker because I also represent Buyers. I do not do dual agency, it is either one or the other, so if I am the Listing Broker and I cut the Buyer Brokers commission then who is going to sell the property? (Even with the lesser amount on the listing info showing less, the Brokers know me and verify what the commission is & they always show my properties because they know they will be paid). I am representing the Seller and it is my job to make sure the home is being shown to Buyers. If a home has a “quirk” I may even increase the Buyers Commission and I take less to make it more attractive BECAUSE I AM REPRESENTING MY CLIENT -

As for my comparison regarding the two professions - You just don’t have a clue do you? Oh, that’s right you don’t, your not a REALTOR. DUH, my mistake!

Salem,

Your practice of changing the SOC depending on who calls will get you sued! two will get the attention of the DOJ. You are obviously one of those agents who has yet to get a huge fine.

Don't say you weren't warned!!

My head is not in the sand, nor am I blind, I just want to know what's the basis of your opinion? Post a link to wherever this "fact" is to be found.

I can say that I personally have NEVER not shown a listing based on either the listing broker, or the compensation offered. But then I also try to not to make assumptions about other agents, and how they do business without factual knowledge.

Read Salems last post..... She is the reason we need to have E & O insurance.

Get Salem sued by who Ricky? The attention of DOJ for exactly what?

Salem,
You are so right look at the discounter whine!
When you hit the discounters with facts they always make veiled comments but never answer a specific question.

And can you feel the love tonight...tonight...
I think it's funny how people jump right on to him. It would probably be more effective to not have any replies to his comments. But then again, then I'd have nothing to read and chuckle about.

--------------------
BNizzle - fo shizzle
Blue Ridge Homes
Buying a Home in Locust Point
Chula Vista Real Estate

Rick said:
I wondered about his statement.
I don't know of any attorneys who would like to be represented (fiduciary) by a Realtor in a transaction, buying or selling. The reason? They don't want to assume any additional liability from the agents actions.
So, how would that be unethical? And why should NAR care?

BNizzle -
He is like the “dorky” relative that no one wants to sit next to at Thanksgiving and is the butt of everyones jokes -

Wait a minute . . .
Rick said:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BUT!!! the point is there are a lot of agents out there doing just that, only showing certain homes without a BBroker Agmt. THIS FOLKS IS UNETHICAL and NAR TURNS A BLIND EYE!!! more like having a black eye if you ask me.

Maybe Realtors are stealing his customers - Maybe they won't sign a BBroker Agmt with him and they are going to Realtors instead! Maybe? :p

And you people consider yourselves "Professionals"? Ms Salem.... if you were a member of the board I belong to, your commission switching practices would land you in a world of hurt including sanctions, fines, and possible license action. On the other hand, if an agent is not a member, the commission listed on MLS is not owed. I just wandered onto this forum today, and I am disgusted by all of you ganging up on this guy because he apparently practices a different business model. All of you responding to him with your put-downs and boycott-type language sound ignorant and foolish. Indeed, Ms Salem, with your quote about becoming great? Shame on you and your hypocrisy! You probably call yourself a Christian too, don't you? Well, WWJD? By the way, I am a full service broker. And also by the way, why doesn't anyone on these forums know the difference between "their" and "there" and "your" and "you're". Collectively, your command of the English language is poor at best. I am beginning to understand why the public views the Realtor population just two levels above car salesmen. Rick, if you are committed to your business model, then do your own thing, and if you have a legitimate gripe about someone else's pratices, contact your state's department of regulation and licensing and file a bona fide complaint! You're better off focusing on doing what you do the best way it can be done, and ignoring the naysayers. Put yourself above the fray - after all, if you wrestle in the mud with pigs long enough, you will eventually realize the pig likes it.

Clueless
Not worth my time -

*SIGH*


Quite honestly, I feel Rick brings up some good stuff sometimes. It's good to read and discuss the different viewpoints in regards to NAR, as well as learning about the vast business models out there, at least I think so. But not being able to back things up w/stats, reports, or whatever, and just ranting about the issues one might have with, or in RE, isn't how things are going to change. Being part of the problem, ie; saying as an agent, that agents are akin to used car salespeople, isn't how things are going to change. On a different topic, some guy once told me, you gotta go balls to the wall, and I find this is true in just about every aspect of life, including this wonderful business we've chosen for ourselves.

BTW, still waiting for something to backup the original post.

Blue Sky Realtor, you are jumping the gun just a bit. You have some valid points, however, your lack of "corporate knowledge" makes you look suspect (and ignorant).

Well said!!

pikes peak said:

pikes peak -
Hummmmm - Makes one wonder - :rolleyes:

Makes you wonder what?

Salem is in a perpetual state of "WONDER"land....

Sort of like Tonya Harding with a real estate license....

Rick -

Did you eat paint chips when you were a kid or are you just naturally stupid?

I think Rick had natural talent but he also practices every time he open his mouth!

When I first entered this forum I assumed I would be participating in issues involving the real estate profession. I am beginning to see a pattern of certain participants getting a kick out of, and apparently feeding off of each others' insults to one particular party. This is not a professional forum. This is high school all over again. Do the other adults out there see this?

If you had some experience with the forum you would have been exposed to Ricks constant rants and raves about NAR and how discounters are always kicked about and attacked. In fact it is Rick the discounter that is constantly doing the attacking. Read his posts before coming to his defense because he is really just a board troll!

BOARD or BORED?

Paul, don't you proof-read your entries?

"I think Rick had natural talent but he also practices every time he open his mouth!"

What on EARTH does this MEAN, anyway????

Are you as stupid as 24Salem7??

Does BOARD mean BORED????

Does THERE mean THEIR? or THEY'RE??

Does TOO mean TO or TWO???

It really IS TRUE!!!! ANYBODY can get a real estate license!!!

TRY..... TRY...... TRY...... to raise the bar - JUST A LITTLE BIT.

Or don't you know what that means EITHER???

HOW CAN THERE BE A "DISCOUNT" WHEN THERE IS NO SET PRICE????

DOESN'T THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BAR REALTORS FROM DISCUSSING COMMISSIONS FOR FEAR OF PRICE FIXING???

THEN HOW CAN THERE BE A "DISCOUNT" IF THERE IS NO "UNDERSTANDING" (WINK, WINK, SECRET HANDSHAKE) OF WHAT THE "NORMAL" COMMISSION IS?

"RICK THE DISCOUNTER"????? PAUL, PAUL, PAUL, WHAT ARE YOU SAYING? IF HE'S A "DISCOUNTER" AND YOU'RE (NOT "YOUR") NOT, DOES THAT MEAN YOU ARE ONE OF THOSE "PRICE FIXERS"???

THERE'S A BATTLE BREWING IN WASHINGTON D.C. ON THIS VERY ISSUE. FASTEN YOU SEAT BELTS BOYS AND GIRLS. PEOPLE ARE PAYING ATTENTION.

Blue Sky,
Are you really that stupid that you cannot figure out my meaning or maybe you are just humor challenged.

And Board means message board perhaps I should use smaller words for your limited intelligence.

Now Blue Sky,
You can calm down and take a deep breath and take the caps lock off.

By discounter I mean a mentality. Those that can only compete buy charging lower commissions.

We are not actually talking commissions as that would require the use of numbers and percentages. Kinda funny but so called discounters talk commission and fees all the time with their flat rate fees. Using your logic DOJ should start coming after the flate raters as price fixers..

Thanks for the helpful assistance with contractions but I believe they covered that somewhere during high school and college. Must be hell for you going through life with such a lame sense of humor.

YOU STILL DIDN'T ANSWER MY QUESTION PAUL - BOARD OR BORED? OR DON'T YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE ON THAT EITHER?

HOW ABOUT BUY AND BY? STILL DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE?

COVERED IT IN HIGH SCHOOL AND COLLEGE?

FEELING THREATENED BY "DISCOUNTERS" IN YOUR MARKET?

YEAH. IT'S HILARIOUS.

What question would that be? Are you unsure if it is board troll or bored troll? Perhaps you should look it up but I would have to say board troll as he is posting on the message board/forum. Now I can not count for his state of mind so he very well could be a bored troll as well. :p

It also appears as if you are uncertain when to use buy or by. Perhaps when you finish your GED classes you will be able to answer that one for yourself.

Feeling threatened by "discounters" in my area? Why would I be threatened by them as they are hardly a major force in my area.

So you are a "discounter" for what brokerage?

Are you guys kidding me? Like 10 or posts on grammar? From an ethics/NAR thread?

We can waste all this space on spelling & grammar, but I can't get any info to back up the original post?

Here it is, from the NAR (realtor.org) website:
"Boards and associations of REALTORS® determine whether the Code of Ethics has been violated, not whether the law or real estate regulations have been broken. Those decisions can only be made by the licensing authorities or the courts."
Again, NAR does not determine COE violation and discipline members. Rick seems to be misinformed in that regard.

Thanks pike. I kinda knew that. I'm just curious if anyone, anywhere, has actually documented Rick's initial thing about buyer agents not showing listings because of commission, or company, or whatever.

You guys are lucky though. You have the 3000lb. Gorilla (NAR) lobbying for you. We have the 3 1/2lb. Chipmunk (NAMB).

I bet a rabid chipmunk could cause a lot of damage to a gorilla though. What does the NAMB do?
--------------------
BNizzle - fo shizzle
Parker Real Estate
Highlands Ranch Real Estate
Littleton Real Estate

National Association of Mortgage Brokers

www.namb.org

That's a very good question. The company that Rick often talks about is Assist2sell. This company calls themselves "A Discount Real Estate Company" (see www.assist2sell.com). They named themselves discounters.

Quote: When I list I put the minimal commission down with a comment in the private remarks stating to call Listing Broker for commission. When a Broker calls and asks about the commission amount I then know if they are a “Discounter”. If they are then my response is “yep, that is what it is”. If the Broker calling is NOT a “Discounter”, then I will tell them that I will increase the Selling side commission to _%. That way the “Discounter” is getting what he / she is use to earning.
You know the saying: You get what you pay for -

Salem, that is an unethical practice. Full disclosure of compensation should be made with an agents first discovery of your inventory. You are wide open for accusations of discrimination. What you are doing is down right sneaky. Not only is it sneaky, but some agents may reject your tactics out of hand and avoid your inventory due to your low co-op. You are no better than the people you critisize.

Don't hold your breath waiting for NAR to come to your rescue. It's not in their best interest.
Not showing a buyer discounted listings, is a breach of your fiduciary duty to the client unless it's disclosed to him/her. It's that simple.
Rick, if you feel that other agencies are boycotting your listings, you need to make the consumer aware of such anti-competitive behavior.
I operate a full service agency with commissions well below the "norm" and I've seen it all.

Sounds like the only agents that would object are those classified as discounters.

Just an observation.

There are no objections from me about the state of the real estate industry. I'm gaining tremendous market share with my program. Market share that wouldn't be there if the real estate industry was truly competitive.

Surprisingly enough Paul, you have no comment on whether or not that type of practice is unethical or not. I have never, as an agent or a broker, ever paid a co-op less than the prevailing rate in my area. Those of you who have ever 'cut a deal' in order to gain share, including you Paul, may now offically call yourselves discounters and also be subject to Salems discriminatory tactics. It's no wonder this board has a accusitory tone when mods foster this type of discussion and lead people to conclusions.

I think what the majority is missing in my posting is that A SET COMMISSION is stated in the MLS for the Buyer Broker. That amount does NOT go down. There may or may not be a bonus. Minimum, ANY (Full or Discount) Buyer Broker will receive what is stated in the MLS. That is not unethical nor is it against the law -

Tucker,
Climb down off your soapbox. I just made an observation and did not lead anyone anyplace. There is no accusitory tone and I am not fostering anything. This is still America last time I checked so I am free to comment. Congratulations that you have never offered less co-op but I could personally care less because I use an EBA which spells out how much I will be paid.

Ethical or Not? That is for her local board to determine which is obviously not an issue because it appears nobody has complained or whined about discrimination. What she is doint is not illegal because the minimum co-op fee to be paid is what is in MLS.

Quote: There may or may not be a bonus.

If there is a field on your input screen in which to enter a bonus, you MUST enter it there. You can't decide when the agent calls with out leaving yourself open to charges of discrimination.

Quote: I think what the majority is missing in my posting is that A SET COMMISSION is stated in the MLS for the Buyer Broker.

We fully understand.

If you don't like what other offices offer for a co-op, write them a letter and disclose what you will pay that office if they buy your listing. Your approach is sneaky and therefor a poor practice.

Quote: Ethical or Not? That is for her local board to determine which is obviously not an issue because it appears nobody has complained or whined about discrimination.

We are in the ethics topic area and you have no idea who has complained or not. Yes, it is for her board to decide and it is for us to discuss. And yes, that object on your shoulder is a chip.

Tucker,
So please tell me how I have a chip on my shoulder?

I would be willing to guess that nobody has complained or I am sure Donna would have mentioned that her policy had been challenged and upheld. SHe appears to be still doing it so we can all safely assume that there has been no ruling against her for doing this.

It appears that it is you that has the chip on the shoulder so consider it knocked off.
Funny but your defensive attitude all started with my simple comment that the only ones that would have issue with with her policy would be the so called "Discounters".

What's wrong did that strike too close to home for you?

Again you fail to address the real issue and would rather point fingers. Any type of an "undisclosed" bonus is highly problematic at best and illegal at worst. And I knocked your chip off first, so there.

Paul,

Yes, there was a ruling agains this. There was a post on the NAR email updates in which a company in the NE was not paying the same Co broke to discounters. The court ruled against that company. I'll try to find that article....

Rick-

If you think I am in violation, then of what Article?

Article 1-9 are duties to clients and customers - (These don't pertain)
Article 10-14 are duties to the public - (These don't pertain)
Articles 15-17 are duties to REALTORS. (Must be in here)

Before you answer, remember that the BUYER BROKER COMMISSION IS LISTED IN THE MLS. It states exactly what the commission is to ALL BROKERS/AGENTS. It is NOT a violation of Article 1, 2, 12, nor is it a violation of Article 6 or 3. Article 17 can't happen because it is disclosed on the MLS and would be paid at the COE. So Rick & Tucker TX - What am I in violation of?
It is not a violation of the MLS because the Commission IS LISTED!. :rolleyes: and NO Bonuses don't have to be listed in the MLS -

Before you answer, I think you should know that I am on the local Grievance Committee - and have been for several years . . .

I have a question for you. I know you list properties but do you also sell properties?
Think about it - don't answer until you have thought about it and I really mean "thought about it". (It is wishful thinking but I hope a light goes on) Rick, I know you have not been a Agent very long and I have no idea how long TUCKER TX has been licensed either but I am betting it hasn't been very long either -

If I remember correctly you stated that you give a different percentage to discounters than to full commission agencies, is that correct. I'll go back and find the post if I need to.

I'll go find the article which listed the court case.

Grievance Committee.... How can you objectively be on a Greivance Committee when you clearly discriminate against discounters. YOU ARE A WALKING CONFLICT OF INTEREST!!!!

Salem, you are in violation of Artical 2:

Article 2
REALTORS® shall avoid exaggeration, misrepresentation, or concealment
of pertinent facts relating to the property or the transaction.

You are concealing the true amount of compensation if Realtors must call in to pass a screen test.

Tucker TX -

You are not correct. Article 1-9 are duties to clients and customers. Article 2 does NOT pertain.
Try again -

It does pertain if you have not disclosed this type of "undisclosed compensation" to your clients.

Tucker TX

My client, who is the Seller, which I have a signed contract with, which has the noted commission.
Try again -

So you are paying a bonus and not inputing that information in the assigned MLS field, correct? And you are only paying this bonus to people you decide are not 'discounters', correct? Let's suppose that 3 agents are denied the bonus, you call them 'discounters' and they all belong to a protected class. How do you explain that you are not engaging in a discriminatory practice?

Tucker & Rick,
Keep trying! It is rather amusing to watch the 2 of you grasp at straws. Donna appears to know the COE rather well and has it locked at this point. Tucker I do not recall "Discounters" being on the protected classes list to qualify for discrimination. This has turned into a great exercise on reading and understanding the COE.

Rick, Tucker -

Why haven't you answered my question?

I would guess my ratio is 60% Listings and 40% Sales. I should close between 50 and 60 files this year.

P.S. That ratio may change quickly as Monday I took 3 Listing appts. for a total of 6 in a week.

Paul, I meant that they were a protected class in addition to being discounters.

Rick -

Come on Rick, why won't you answer my question?

Tucker TX -

Are you associated with a "discounted" brokerage? Are you a Realtor?

Am I a Realtor? Please.... Do you you think I could catch you in so many violations without being a Realtor? What was your second guess, Attorney? I'm flattered.

Tucker,
Sorry but so far you have not caught her in any violations at all. Each thing you have mentioned has not been a COE violation.

I know also what you meant by protected classes but you are really reaching on that one because there is an equal chance that the bonus would have been paid to one of the protected class so that would void your argument on protected classes.

Artical 2 is the only COE violation I could find.(1) The fact that she has an undisclosed bonus is an MLS violation.(2) She states that she has explained her tactic to the seller and that would relieve that one. But, imagine that conversation: "Here's the deal Mr. and Mrs. Seller, I'm going to post (much?) lower than the prevailing rate on the MLS and make those dirty discounters pay! Yes, some agents may not want to show your home if they don't call me first to get the secret handshake or they are a discounter. It really is more important that I conduct my personal vendetta visa v your home. After all, I really don't like those people and their buyers and I have an axe to grind. Who cares if they have the money to buy your home, I have a war to wage." Of course not in so many words, but that is how it ends up. That type of approach is not in the clients best interest and not acting in your clients best interest is always a violation.(3)

As far as protected classes, the potential exisists, is it really worth rolling the dice on that one?(4) Not for me.

Just to clarify, I think it is abusive to post extremely low or no compensation on the MLS to manipulate the system. It's a poor practice and won't stand the test of time.

Tucker,

Using your logic a "discounter" who posts low co-op fees would also be in violation...all of those $1 co-op or 1%

**use of these numbers is strictly for educational or entertainment use only and in no way endorses any commissions**

listings are also not in the best interest of the client.

Undisclosed bonus may not be MLS violation for her MLS system. The only system you can speak to is your own and does not apply to Article 2

Unless the co-op is mentioned in her listing presentation it has Zero relevance. Seller is agreeing to pay her X percentage to list and market her home.

Our Listing contracts disclose co-op amounts.

I would think most MLS systems have a field for a bonus.

I don't understand how a listing is not in the best interest of the person requesting it.

It is an abuse of the broker co-operative (MLS) to post $1 co-ops, and in my opinion anything below the prevailing rate.

Tucker TX (You too Rick)

You are not understanding at all - You just don't get it. I AM NOT IN VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 2! Article 1-9 are "DUTIES TO CLIENTS AND CUSTOMERS". In a co-op sale the Buyer Broker/Agent is NOT a client nor a customer!

Yes, and so do ours.

Well, then quit thinking - we don't

Well, well, well - WELCOME TO THE OTHER WORLD!
*** A "Brokerage" lists a "Co-Op" Commission below the "prevailing rate", and that brokerage is considered a "Discount Brokerage" BUT that same “Discount Brokerage” expects to be paid the “PREVAILING RATE” (or more) and NOT a discounted rate when they sell a competitors listing. So, what? - “Discounters” want their cake and eat it too? Only in a Socialist Democrat world - Do you finally get it?

A "Discounter" should expect to be paid what they are willing to pay.

I am right, you are; lets just say "In Error" and move on to another discussion.

Tucker TX -
Another note -
A undisclosed "Bonus" is NOT a MLS violation.

NOTE: I Have Never Posted A "NO COMPENSATION" ever on the MLS.
NOTE: By extremely "low", you mean like a "Discounter Brokerage"? :p

“Discounters” want their cake and eat it too?

It's 'eat your cake and have it too'. Everyone has their cake and eats it too.

Tucker
I know what I wrote -
It was NOT in error -
You really don't get it - do you -
Oh well, I'm not surprised - :rolleyes:

NOTE: By extremely "low", you mean like a "Discounter Brokerage"?

Yes

Oh I get it, you're as crazy as my wife.

Your wife must be a very intelligent individual!

So, are you associated with a discount brokerage? (You never answered)