I'm about to list my home and would like
some opinions on how select an agent.

First some background. I live in a gated community of approx 100 homes built around 2000.
The listings in my city is dominated by three
real estate offices (they probably have 90% of
the listings). In my community, there have
been several sales in the last few years and
the majority have listed with the same agent.
This agent usually lists the home at a reasonable to lower list price and her homes usually sell very fast. Homes that are not listed by her, are usually priced higher and take longer to sell. Once a new higher price is established, then she will follow.

The agents from the three offices usually steer
there clients to listings from their office. I
have talked to a neighbor who had gone with an agent from a smaller office (not one of the three) who was their friend, and they listed at slightly more than the agent with all the business. Their experience was that none of the
agents wanted to show their home...they felt that
each office that had qualified buyers wanted to
steer them to their own office listings. The
homes here are priced from 1.2 to 1.4 mill.

My question is should I give my listing to her?
Is it better to list with agents who are superstars (ie top agent in the office) or go with someone fresh who might be more attentive and aggressive. Why is it that if an office has 75 agents with 100+ listings that the majority
of those listing are from 5 or so agents in that
office. Are people going with the superstars because they have other listings and have sold
many homes or are these agents really that good.

I've interview with a few agents from each office and they all say similar things. I didn't
get an impression that one agent was better than
the others. They all wanted to price the house
as low as possible and still get the listing.
In terms of what they will do to get the house
sold quickly and at the highest price, they all
say pretty much the same thing...get the house
ready to show, price is key...if low you'll get alot of interest and if too high not that much interest, etc.

Any advice and opinions would be appreciated.
Thanks.

Typically those agents are really that good. You need to evaluate your needs, a good Realtor will help you in that process. If you think there is room in the market for a price increase, discuss those possibilities with an agent, but remember, it is all to easy to want more without the consequences. Experienced agents know the local economics and will help you through that decision process.

Those agents are being unethical. I'd report them to the local board. If they are indeed members of the board (REALTORS®), they have a duty to show their clients any home that meets the clients needs. They also cannot boycott. They've broken so many codes in our ethics policy that they should be investigated.

Me, I am biased because I wouldn't use a company who was unethical, even if it took my home longer to sell. Perhaps the new agent can advertise in a luxury home magazine or on the internet to attract enough attention. I say go with your gut. This is your home and you also don't want it to linger.

If you want to try another agent, look for a Luxury Home Specialist or Certified Residential Specialist.

http://www.luxuryhomemarketing.com/
http://www.crs.com/

Thanks for the post. This is a good topic.

Dee before you jump to the unethical side... suggest you review the code yourself...


Sorry for long post... but if you really want to know:

As a Seller, if you wish to view real estate from the real world position you will generally find several factors that result in properties getting sold.

Number one is and always has been Location and since yours is not a $1.2 to $1.4 Million dollar Mobile Home... well the Location factor is already set.

The next factor is Price. Real Fair Market Valuation based on now long...Days on Market, you can work with... the lower DOM the lower the initial List Price... longer DOM allow higher list price up to the Fair Market Value. While you can set the List Price.... you have no control over the Fair Market Value... or the Max Value the Buyer will see in your property. You may have to go with the lower to reach an agreed price ( counter offers may be standard but don't assume so)

The next most important factor is Marketing...

While you may be impressed by the number of Listing a company has..... it is common practice for some companies to spend most if not all their marketing efforts on getting listing... and trust the MLS to get them sold.

Many brokerages have bonus payment to agents that sale from brokerage inventory.... nothing at all unethical about that. They are promoting their listing over those of competing brokerages... that is real world .

Another real world fact is that many properties often are available that fit a clients criteria. Many if not Most Buyers do not wish to search every possibility available... time is worth something and most at that level of financial competency realize that and also understand real world market forces.

You can use those forces to your benefit or allow them to be used against you.

It really does not matter if you pick a big or small company... just a competent agent knowledgeable of your area, preferably with buyer side sales in that area or a good scenes of Marketing.

The good marketing ability is probably your best choice. Have several CMAs, evaluations by various Agents... DO NOT fall for a low commission buy in attempt by an agent.... they are probably desperate.... but the MOST IMPORTANT reason is it will kill your ability to have the property shown.

As you are probably aware commissions are generally split between the office that list the property and the office that sales the property, which is the most common occurrence in most areas. Those real estate companies then split those commissions with the agents that worked the sale. An easy/typical example would be a 50/50 split between companies and a 50/50 between the company and agent... agent gets 25% of the commission less any brokerage fees they may have which are also typical and can reduce the agents net commission significantly from that 25%.

If your base commission it too low then agent will not place you at the top of their showing list of similar properties.... sorry but that is real world ... agent do this for a living and not as a pure public service. This is not unethical... it is real world free market activity. They are not "refusing" to show... you just have significantly lower placement on the show list they made of criteria fitting properties.

If your property were the ONLY one that fit the criteria it would be shown... bu that is uncommon.

You and your agent should list the property just below the true AS-IS Market value in line with documented analysis. You should maintain the commission in line with compitition.... or consider raising it.

Raising it would generate higher showing due to improved placement on showing list as it would generate higher net commissions for everyone.... BUT raising commissions could be expensive.

Who would you like to reward for the sale? Your agent? Maybe... How about the agent that brought you an offer that you accept?

By offering a Bonus to the agent that brings you an acceptable offer you have dramatically increased your marketing effectiveness for a lesser cost that it would be if you increased the commissions alone... why? because most Bonuses are given to the Agent with out splits from the brokerages. 100% bang for the bucks. For the same effect you would have to have a massive reduction in List Price or a far larger commission increase.

It motivates not only your agent to find a buyer fast but all other agents.

Again... it is real world and again it is NOT unethical in any way. It is a way to promote the property not ONLY to buyers but to agents also!!.... and ask yourself... who brings the buyers to see the property?

Not only is boycotting not upholding our fiduciary duties , but it's illegal per Antitrust Laws. This is the exact situation that we covered in the Ethics Update courses that we had to take here in Texas this January.

The seller's post, VERBATIM:

1. "The agents from the three offices usually steer there clients to listings from their office".

2. "I have talked to a neighbor who had gone with an agent from a smaller office (not one of the three). Their experience was that none of the agents wanted to show their home...they felt that each office that had qualified buyers wanted to steer them to their own office listings."

This is absolutely unacceptable and seems to meet the boycotting guidelines, as I remember in the Ethics course. Here are definitions of Boycotting/Anti-Trust from a Government website. :

C. Three Elements to Anti-Trust Violations
1. Combination or Conspiracy
a. Existence of concerted action by knowing participant
b. A specific intent to monopolize
c. An overt action

2. In Restraint of Trade
a. Limits ability to do business
b. Which is Unreasonable
c. Causing damage to injured party

From realtor.org

If you believe there is room for pricing increase, insist on it, but listen carefully to experience.

If you visit virtually any Realtor's website, you'll see a section 'my listings'. Why is that, if not for increasing the possibility of sale of those properties? Am I 'steering' you or am I showing you properties that I believe may meet your criterm?

You must remember that when working with buyers/sellers, it is important not to waste anyones' time. Part of the process is weeding out the needs and wants. What may be efficiency to a busy Realtor, may be rumor to a seller. I don't agree with Dee and quite frankly find her accusations unjust without much pertinent info. Which in the Realestate world treads uneven ground. With that being said however, if you feel that a contrivention has/is occuring, notify the local board and they will investigate.

BASED on what he said and the exact language he used, this seems like possible boycotting. He said these agents dominate the area and "steer" people towards their listings. Obviously, agents want to sell their own listings, but his friend listed his house with someone else and felt they weren't showing his home only because they wanted to sell their own listings. It's fine to try to get the buyer to own one of your own broker's listings, but you can't refuse to show other agent's listings, which is what the seller seemed concerned about.

We can't know the entire story in one post, but if it smells like a rat, we should point it out. It does not "tread ground" to point out areas that could be unethical. As a matter of fact, we have a duty to do this and I see James Lee and a lot of good agents in this forum bringing up ethics if they see a problem. I was concerned in this case because this is the EXACT scenario we talked about with the Broker/Lawyer Commmittee in January.

I think he should price at or below market, but REALTORS® are not supposed to boycott. We have dominate luxury home agents in our market that absolutely will not show a listing if you aren't in their network. As a homeowner, he needs to decide on what's best for him, which would be to price it at market. In terms of who he chooses, he can decide who would best sell his home.

'Steering towards' does not expressly mean 'refusal to show'. I agree that if we spot unprofessional behavior, we have an obligation. I do not believe that this obligation is public condemnation.

However, one of our greatest obligations is to avoid derogatory activities towards others in the industry. Without MUCH more information in regards to this situation, little can/should be said other than to lodge a complaint with the board.

I was referring to this text. Red flags should be raised when a seller thinks dominate agents won't show his home. This sounds like a pattern and he's seen it happen to his friend.

In terms of the code of ethics, I'd understand your concern if I said, "Don't go with XYZ Realty because they aren't as good as my company". We're talking about a seller who would like to use a new agent, but seems to feel afraid that he has to price it their way and use their company or his listing won't get shown. Big red flag.

My person view is that this dominate agent is
not ethical and maybe it's because I'm biased
and don't like her. The details is that my
neighbor last year listed his house at 1.35 Mil,
the dominate agent offered to list at 1.25 Mil.
After several weeks with little traffic, he
called the agent and asked her to show his house, pointing out the 3% commission to the
buyers agent. After several months and no offers he withdraw his property. This agent
did not show his house and neither did any other
agents from her office. Was he boycotted? I
think so. Can he prove it? Probably not. Can
he file a report? Probably, but he won't do
it...not worth is effort and not worth getting
more agent(s) upset at him. Maybe will relist
his house again in the future and doesn't
want any trouble.

My main concern in this thread is not to talk
about ethics but whether agents and offices
really have that much clout. Seems like in
my area there are a few successfull agents and
offices in a sea of many agents and offices.
There is a huge gap between the top agents and
all rest. I think the reality is that both
buyers and sellers are impressed by sucess and
they seem to want to deal with top agents. These
agents promote their achievements and this leads
to more success.

I feel like I would like to go with a different
agent, one that doesn't have so many listings,
and one who may be a little more agressive in
pricing and who may work harder. Rather than
go with a top agent that will list my home
in the lower range and then send out post cards
to my neighbors annoucing that she has just
sold my house in 1 day.

Is there any truth to top agents having influence
in the realty office. If they don't get a listing that they feel they should get, will they
influence others in their office. Seems to me
that the ugly truth is that well connected agents
seem be very networked and trade favors. Am I
being paranoid?

So you are a renegate seller AND you agree with me!

I don't want you to be paranoid, but I do understand what you're saying because I've heard of the same thing happening here. Most of the time, when you deal with a lot of money, you're going to start having people who want to monopolize listings. When I read your post, it sounded like something was going on with that office.

Anyway, it sounds like you want to give another agent a shot, but they may have to study the marketing efforts of other agents to mimic that success. In terms of price, it seems as if they should price it competitively and generate buyer leads on their own. Perhaps they can hold a very nice open house, advertise to other brokers in the city, use their sphere of influnce, and advertise heavily on the internet. I recommended the luxury home specialists and CRS agents because you'd have a good shot at getting someone who has experience in this area.

It's a tough decision, but you seem to really want to give someone new a shot.

It has long been my experience that listings begat more listings as well as more sales because they generate more calls and offer a particular agent more exposure, i.e. more signs in more yards mean more calls, more ads means more calls, etc., etc.

A track record of success like you mention would be hard to beat especially if want to sell fairly quickly and move on.

Most superstars are superstars because they're aggressive and attentive to their client's needs and wishes.

On the other hand if you have some time and want to push the price envelope a bit I'm sure the superstar won't walk away from your listing if you insist on a premium price, at least for 30 days or so depending on what the average time on the market is in your area.

Again in my opinion and my experience it's pretty important to do business with someone you feel comfortable with and someone you believe has the ability and the tools to get the job done for you.

I've observed that some agents feel like they have to 'outbid' other agents in a competative situation in order to have a chance at getting that listing. The rationale would be to get the listing at whatever price and then reduce it as needed over the listing period until it finally sells.

I think you're better off to list at what the market is paying for houses like yours and get it sold right away. Usually the first offer you get is going to be your best one.

Do you believe that buyers in your area are waiting for the next underpriced listing to hit the market and then jump on it? Some sellers believe that if a home sells quickly, then it must have been underpriced.

Not so.

It was likely perfectly priced.

Today's buyer is very internet savvy and VERY aware of going market values. In years past, agents had much more influence. Not any more, and you have to consider what would motivate a buyer to pay more than market value when they don't have to?

You will have to decide if price or terms is more important. If you are willing to sit on the market and "stand out" as the home people do not want right away, but you end up getting your price, you can try that. (Price-driven philosophy). Although, as a buyer's agent, I point out days on market to my clients (Full disclosure, fiduciary responsibility). If the average home sells in 20 days and we are going to see one that has been on the market 160, WHY??? I am a referral-based business. If my buyer purchases that home, then suddenly has to move, do I want that listing now? That buyer either paid too much or bought a home that may have had inherent problems. Now will I have trouble selling it and then have my client unhappy with me?

If you would rather get a good price, sell quickly, not mess with showings, and have a short to time to deal with ANY agent you choose, then price at market and move on. (Terms-driven philosophy).

Can I say that I think it is increasingly difficult in today's Internet-driven market to "steer" clients to certain listings. Most buyers are at home on the Internet and they know what is on the market. If there is home they want to see, they will say something if it isn't chosen. Is it so different in other parts of the country?

Looked up some quick articles. Per Realty Times, only 6% of Luxury home buyers paid over asking price in 2003. Most seem to pay market, so the home has to be priced right.

UniqueHomes.com had an article that said a common technique to selling luxury homes is to price it just under market to invite a bidding war.
http://www.uniquehomes.com/C0305luxsource2.cfm

By the way, NAR has a field guide to marketing luxury homes. http://www.realtor.org/libweb.nsf/pages/fg306