I know the topic about different designations have been discussed on here. Did a search on whether a broker's license or designations would be better, didnt find it.

So, my question is: Is having a broker's license (if want to remain in real estate transactions, not necessarily focused on building a brokerage firm) more credible, than having the e-PRO, GRI, etc. designations?

Having a brokers license, in my opinion, is going to trump any designations.

Your usual client may not know the difference between an Agent and a Broker, but they will have at least heard of both.

Once you tell them the difference between the two, they will "get it". Designations are sometimes more hard to pin down in the publics mind. Also, the Broker license is going to have more credibility since it's a test and process done by the state rather than some private organization. Not saying the perception is "right", just that it exists.

On the flip side, I think there are some designations out there that are valuable from an education stand-point. I would suggest that you only get designations that you feel you could explain to someone in a way that leaves them thinking that having that designation is a really good thing.

For instance, I just finished up my ePro designation. Now I can sit down with someone and give them the schpeal on what that is supposed to mean, but I don't see clients being terribly worried about it.

Besides, what specifically tell them you are going to do for them regarding the net or technology is going to be WAY more impressive than to simply say "I am an ePro." And by the time you finish telling them about your tech/net plan, the ePro designation is not really needed any more.

Get the Brokers and look at designations that look like they hold some value that you can directly use with clients.

But if you have to choose between a designation and a broker license, go with the brokers license.

R

Broker's licenses have different meanings and different descriptions in different states.

In Tennessee for example there are two types of broker's license; 1. Real Estate Broker or 2. Real Estate Affiliate Broker.

There is no "agent" or "salesperson" license.

In Tennessee a real estate licensee can not be anyone's "agent" with a written, bi-lateral agency agreement, i.e. listing or buyer agency, saying they are hiring you specifically to be their agent.

Have a Tennessee Broker's license merely means you are qualified (at least the state says you legally are) to operate a real estate brokerage firm.

You must first obtain an Affiliate Broker's license, maintain it for 2 years, take a couple of courses, and then pass an additional test to obtain a Broker's license.

To further confuse things one who holds a Broker's license but is not the principal broker of a real estate firm but merely works for that firm is traditionally known as a "Broker Affiliate".

In Tennessee anyway, there can only be one Principal Broker and that's the guy (or gal) who's name the firm's license is in.

Although I've been qualified for a Broker's license for many years I've never taken the test and probably never intend to because; a. I never (at the moment anyway :p ) intend to operate my own real estate brokerage firm and b. I don't see any benefit to being called a "Broker Affiliate" over an "Affiliate Broker".

As far as a Broker's license giving you more credability over one or more NAR designations I frankly don't see very much difference, if any.

I think consumers of real estate services put more stock in who they perceive you are and what they perceive you can do for them rather than what titles follow your name whether it be "Broker, Broker Affiliate, Affiliate Broker, GRI, BS, JIM, or ETC.

Were I in a state where the choices were: "Broker" or "Salesperson" I might think differently.

Can't you use the hours obtained getting the designations, to go towards the broker license?

Sort of killing two birds with one stone?

(Here in Texas, it takes 970 hours to get your broker's license.)

Brought this up to live because I have given this more thought and want to see how others might feel about a broker's license:

I dont necessarily intend to **open** a new brokerage firm in town. But if I plan to be where I'm at the same brokerage firm, I want to create a good team/ partner(s) that shares the same core value to operate under. (I know I dont need a broker's license for teams, but my family has given me some ideas, just in case I want to start on my own)....

My question is: Is there an advantage there? A Broker's Associate with a few agents in the team/ or partners within the team? What would be the disadvantages?

Hours are hours. At least out here in california.

If there are classes required for a designation that are also applicable to getting a brokers license, that should be fine.

If a certain number of hours worked is required to get some designation or your brokers, you should be able to apply those hours to both things. I don't see how one would know about the other in any event to complain about using the hours "twice". Did that make any sense?

R