Real estate commissions

December 30, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

You’d think the uptick in sales of entry-level housing this year might be welcome relief for real estate agents and brokers, but think again.

Nationally, commissions crept up to 5.29 percent this year, but the dollar value of commissions actually receded to its lowest level in seven years. Realtors sold more houses, but because so many first-time buyers came into the market, the average sale price of the houses plunged. As a result, overall income shrank, according to a Bloomberg News story.

David Brenton has seen good times and bad in his nearly two decades of selling houses full-time, and he’s been able to hold pat on commissions since the late ’90s, ranging from 5.75 percent to 10 percent depending on the home.

Brenton, a broker associate at Re/Max Select Realtors in Greenwood, says potential clients have agitated for lower commissions since inflation ebbed nearly a generation back. Low inflation and only modest increases in home values mean owners have built less equity, so they want to cut costs as much as possible during a sale.

However, Brenton has been able to convince them that he’s worth the money. Anyone can sell a house in good times, he says; in bad times, experience counts.

“Clients need a Realtor’s services in a market like this more than in a market that’s booming,” he says.

Are you seeing changes in commissions? And what about real estate brokers, themselves? How do you value their services?
 

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Realtors are On the Way Out
    The old days of realtors providing substantial service are gone. Today the buyer does the research, tells the agent or agents which houses he or she wants to see, knows the value of the neighborhood, and has already arranged financing. The advances in the Internet will continue to shrink the ranks of realtors who think they are worth so much and as a four time buyer and seller in 20 years, it's about time.

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT