Typically, agents charge 2% for selling in Singapore.
This can be negotiated down based on the price. If your unit is worth $1,000,000, then 1.5% is 15k, which is still good money, so many will take it. The higher the price, the lower you can push the %.
You can contact the guys on Propseller to bring the commission down to as little as 1%. I hope it helps.
MANY sellers choose to offer “less” commission. There is a misrepresentation in your question. Redfin Listings are not more likely to provide a “less” commission than any other brokerage.
When a seller lists their house, they provide a commission for their representation and services PLUS a commission to be paid to the buyer side. NONE of Redfin’s advertising as to “less” commission is about agents who work in other firms. Redfin agents are generally on a salary and not a commission. There are some exceptions, like “partner agents.”
IF a seller decides to offer “less,” and many do, that is a comprehensive industry option and not merely or even primarily a Redfin claim or standard practice. In fact, in my experience, they are less likely to do that than many other firms because it is the seller’s decision and not the Brokerages decision.
The seller offers an amount to ensure that as many agents as possible will show their home. If the “buyer-side” is less than what the seller provides, that savings usually goes to the buyer and not the seller. This particularly true in more progressive markets.
I like this question. I think that these are the ideas that are on the mind of consumers, and unfortunately, the agent doesn’t end up looking that good unless we spell it out for inquiring consumers!
Any agent that lets commission determine what houses they will or will not show a buyer client needs to get out of the business for the sake of all of us agents that believe in the code of ethics.
First, we put our clients’ interests ahead of our own every day.
Second, if we are Realtors, we took an oath to that effect.
Third, if they don’t see it with us, they will see it with someone else.
Fourth, it would feel pretty icky if a client ever asked about the commission rate of the houses we DID show them versus a handful that we chose NOT to show them.
I feel the same way about iBuyer offers. Agents that don’t bring them to seller clients (where available and applicable) are harming their sellers.
Buyer’s agents don’t get paid less, Redfin seller’s and buyer’s agents do. When Redfin lists a property on an MLS, they pay what is typical of a full commission in the area to compete, which shows just how wrong their model is.
Less commission is better than no commission.
If the property is the best match for the client, the real estate agent should be showing the property regardless of the commission amount.
Because if they do not find any home for the buyer, they get nothing. That is like saying a car dealer would only sell to people that do not want a deal and will pay sticker price
If the house is advertised, the buyer may know about it and view themselves, and if buyers agreement about to expire can just wait and cut the agent out completely.
Because that agent sees their job as being to get the client into the best home for them? Perhaps the client is a repeat customer who has bought houses at full fees before? Maybe the client is considered listing their current residence for sale with that agent, but wants to lock up a house to buy first? Perhaps the redfin listing owner has promised to buy a house the agent has for sale if they can get their home sold?
Those are some reasons that I can think of immediately.
Your premise is flawed. First, your question that if a group is no longer there will they be paid less makes no sense.
As for the rest, while I do believe that agent/broker roles will likely change and commissions will probably go down, the idea that real estate will become a point and click experience is absurd. There are way too many moving parts, and it’s way too complicated for that to ever happen, not to mention how much money is on the line.
The real estate industry is different from other ones that got taken out by technology. When you’re looking for a car, or plane tickets, or hotels, those are easily quantifiable and merely a matter of which one has a better price. No two houses are the same, and market knowledge matters.
The sad truth is that working with an excellent agent/broker can be a life-changing experience and huge money-saving one, but the bar to entry to the industry is so low that those are in the distinct minority. And many get little or no training. Here is an example of why someone who is outstanding matters:
We had a client who was about to put down $5M in cash on a house. With your vision, they just go on a website and buy it. The reality is I discovered that they had tried to hide a significant flaw in the property that would have cost them close to $250K to fix. Upon my advice, they bailed out of the deal. It was some months later before they bought something, but they were much happier they waited. And so was I. That’s why you need us.
I have been a Real Estate Investor for over 30 years. It is ridiculous that if you sell a $300K house, it will probably cost you $18K in commissions. It is insane, yet almost impossible to overcome this insanity.
The problem you have is decades of crony capitalism laws that have been passed to favor Real Estate Brokers. It is challenging to fight against decades of slowly adding laws all in the “Name” of protecting the consumer. In some ways, it is like Tesla having to fight against the laws about dealerships.
And these laws vary in every state. This is why it is difficult because it is not about just coming up with a revolutionary change, but having to reverse laws that have been slowly built like laying bricks for years. And you got lobbyist fighting changes.
When I post comments like this, I will usually get some Real Estate Agent comments they are protecting their customer and so and on. This is how monopolies justify themselves and get laws passed to keep the status quo.
This is why I say it will take a big player to come in and be able not to overcome this massive obstacle.
Real Estate brokers are NOT a monopoly. Independent brokers and agents fiercely compete for business. In most states, the fees by law are negotiable. Some Websites use sophisticated algorithms and artificial intelligence to estimate property values. Still, they are no substitute for qualified agents and professional appraisers who know the market and what is essential. Most parts of managing real estate transactions require skilled people and simply cannot be automated.
One of the essential values of good real estate agents is that they’re able to work objectively to minimize the inevitable emotion that comes with selling and buying homes, and to protect both buyers and sellers. Although I’ve retired from real estate, after being a highly successful agent, I would not try to list and sell my own home. Even when I was an active agent, I hired a colleague to sell my house rather than doing it myself and was, of course, delighted to reward the broker who brought me a buyer.
When I bought land in a different state to build a new home, I would not have considered trying to search for myself. I had a buyer’s agent represent me beginning with the search and through the negotiating and closing. Without that agent, I might have lost that deal.
The reason most sellers have better results with a professional real estate agent is that they’re worth their commissions and usually achieve a higher net price for the seller AFTER the commission has been paid than if the seller had done a for Sale by owner FSBO transaction.
I thought 20 years ago that it was absurd how much a Seller paid to sell their property. We found a flat fee listing Realtor and paid her $1,300 on the listing side and offered 3% to the Buyer’s Realtor. We saved $18k, and our listing agent ultimately got the Buyer side of the commission, so she made almost $20k.
We were lucky, and we had a highly desirable, unique property.
The typical homeowner may not have the ability to see past the clutter, dirt, smells, price too high, and more. So we will need assistance from a Realtor to help sell for a maximum amount.
Every property, seller, buyer, realtor, mortgage lender is unique, so getting to the finish line in a property sale can be fraught with hurdles.
Realtors may work for months with an unrealistic Seller or Buyer and ultimately earn no commission.
It’s a shame the National Association of Realtors don’t raise the barrier to entry and have Realtors go on a Retainer basis like attorneys so that if a disloyal or unscrupulous Buyer or Seller wastes a Realtor’s time they will experience the economic damage, not the Realtor.
I don’t think so. Sure real estate professionals signed some sucker deals with their work product for decades now. I do applaud the way the industry engages technology. Sure there are current models that apply this question to some extent. Overall, consumers do value the informed professional services that full-service brokerages offer. Until the commission issue, there will be fixed costs that need to be covered by the professionals in the industry. The various laws across just the US alone are a hurdle as well. Compliance with all the different real estate laws is an onerous task if the industry goes to fewer players. There are labor laws, contracts, and tax laws, local, county, state and federal housing laws, consumer protection laws, criminal, environmental laws, intellectual property laws, copyright and patent laws to contend with. Real estate is one of the few industries practiced under 100% commission-based compensation. How many buyers/sellers would want to or can pay an upfront retainer? That hasn’t happened yet, so there is little incentive to pursue it currently.
I do find it interesting to engage in these types of wonderment. I am thinking up the grand theme and all the changes needed to come close to accomplish and what a herculean task full accomplishment would represent. Without sounding like I’m anti-technology, but I could see this becoming a monopoly where homeowners lose marketing control of their real property, in perpetuity. With the digitization of our world, this will be a new frontier of property rights. No matter the outcome, it will certainly be interesting to live through.
The classical real estate agent and brokers are changing with the E-Commercial real estate company like Zillow and REDFIN are equivalent to brokers, and they don’t need lots of agents because they serve the investment community. Educated buyers, now you can list your home on the websites of these companies for Sale your house at a much lower cost than before. And the listing is available to all buyer worldwide. They have the full support system for you to do research and estimate home value and browsing the market for understanding the market you are looking for
the new technology will not obsolete experts in local area if you are a million dollars producers and had good understanding of the local market to get the right deals for high price buyer. They don’t need to buy at the lower than market value but at excellent quality for luxury and enjoyment of your home, which can give the buyer the future appreciation and the pleasure of many years to come. Location and location and home quality for enjoyment
Well, you are assuming that automation will replace the agent. Well, I just want to know
Will automation check on a vacant house to make sure it hasn't been vandalized? Or get the stuff fixed that has been?
Is automation going to hold Open Houses so buyers can go by and see houses and talk with somebody about the area?
Is automation going to take your side when your buyer backs out the day before closing?
Is automation going to stand up for you when an agent messes you up? Whom are you going to call? Do you have time for that?
I'm thinking automation is going to be an option only for those who have lots of time to get their house ready to sell, prequel all buyers who want to look at their home, negotiate the deal, pack move and make sure both parties
They are a bit old fashioned, but I still see them from time to time.
Usually, a seller adds a bonus if it is a hard house to sell. So be wary when you see a bonus offered. I just searched for active ones so you can see what they look like to an agent.
“$1,000 bonus at closing for Selling Agent with signed around PSA!”
It’s an added incentive for your agent to steer you to that house and pressure them to convince you to buy it. They are still valid in some States that don’t have Buyers Agents. But most of the time, they are a conflict of interest for your agent, so the agent offers to give it to you rather than take it.
They started back in the days when agents were allowed to keep the bonus without paying a % of it to their Broker. Also, a bonus costs the seller less than an increase in the % offered, and it also costs them less than a price reduction.
The bonus is usually over and above the %, but when I just looked them up, some sellers reduced the % and added the bonus. So the net was lower and not higher than what you may have agreed that your agent is paid. So “a bonus” doesn’t always mean more.
It’s just a seller trying something he thinks will help sell his house.
No disrespect to the other answers here, but I don’t think they’re quite clear enough to the lay-person.
When a listing goes on MLS, the listing agent splits the total commission with a buyers agent. So if it’s a 5% commission, it usually offers 2.5% to the buyer's agent who brings a ready willing and able buyer, and the listing brokerage keeps the rest.
A buyer agent bonus is typically above and beyond that. Something like:
“2.5% to a buyers agent, plus a $5k bonus if an offer is accepted before XYZ date and the deal closes.”
And it is a proposition that brings issues with it.
I tell my buyers that it’s there, and it’s theirs if they like and want the place.
That’s an easy one. A buyer agent bonus is simply a bonus a seller is offering to any buyer’s agent that brings an acceptable offer for his house.
While the idea sounds good in theory, it often doesn’t work out in the real world
Buyers want to buy the home of their choice, not the home that will get their agent a bigger paycheck.
Occasionally agents might be tempted to influence a buyer towards the more significant paycheck option for them, and that is not only wrong, but it’s also unethical.
If a seller's house is not selling, there is a problem somewhere; generally, it’s the price, but it could also be a condition that can be cured by improving the situation or lowering the cost.