RE/MAX: Is it actually worth the money? (Fixing a broken model)

If you take a look at that "Housing" PDF, you’ll see a massive amount of negative feedback from people dealing with our local RE/MAX offices. The general vibe I get is that the whole setup is pretty much a useless model where these agencies don't actually provide any real value, and honestly, they might even be doing more harm than good. Most of them act like these "lures" who barely know anything about the properties they represent and won't guarantee a single thing, yet they sit right there as this annoying barrier between the buyer and the seller, taking an absurdly large cut of the money for almost zero service. Usually, their entire job description boils down to slapping together a listing—which is often super vague and filled with those terrible, wide-angle photos without even a floor plan—refreshing the ad once a month on some free site, and then basically just walking a buyer from the sidewalk up to the front door.

I guess one of the biggest headaches for me personally is that this whole system makes it impossible to list realistic prices, which just drags the entire market down. You don't get actual market rates; instead, you just have the same exact apartments sitting there indefinitely at prices that, in most cases, aren't going to lead to a sale. Sales happen minimally, while these agencies just survive by squeezing every possible cent out of those rare transactions, charging amounts that feel totally unrealistic.

You’ll have a dozen different agencies all trying to list the same house, and they start playing these weird little games. For example, they might keep prices artificially high on several listings just so they can push a specific property at what looks like a "deal" by comparison, or they’ll keep ads live for houses that sold a year ago just to pad their inventory. If they manage to "sell"—or rather, list—20 homes in a neighborhood over a year for $2,200 a month when the real value is closer to $1,600, then everyone else in that area starts copying those inflated prices to match. On top of that, that 3-4% slice of the pie that goes to these agencies isn't nothing; it really does scare people off from buying or selling altogether. Plus, this model messes with sellers too—they can just let an overpriced ad sit there for three years for free because the agency is footing the advertising bill while pretending to "work" on the sale. It’s all just a bunch of motion without any actual movement.

THE OLD MODEL (bad):

AGENCY JOB: Listing the place, showing it to buyers.
PAYMENT: A one-time, massive fee upon closing that is way out of proportion to the work done (often taken from people who didn't even want to deal with an agency in the first place).
AGENCY ROLE: A roadblock between the buyer and seller; they aren't responsible for anything, don't need to know the details of the house, and are basically just gambling on whether they'll see a check in the future.

THE NEW MODEL (my suggestion):

AGENCY JOB: Listing the property, showing it to buyers, gathering honest info about the home, verifying paperwork/titles, and assisting with the transaction to keep both sides safe.
PAYMENT STRUCTURE:
- Property listing - $17, once a month (paid by the seller)
- Showing the property to a buyer - $167 ($83 from each side)
- Gathering property information - $83 (paid by the interested buyer)
- Verifying property documents/title - $167 (paid by the interested buyer)
- Transaction assistance for security - $667 from each side
AGENCY ROLE: A service provider that clients choose as needed, charging for specific tasks in real-time so they don't have to wait for a sale to close to get paid.

So, my thought is that an agency should just perform the specific services clients ask for and charge fair, market-driven rates for them—the numbers I listed might be different, but you get the idea. Just a clean, transparent way of doing things. That would allow the market to actually function and prices to stabilize based on reality.

Anyway... I'm no economist. Let me know if I'm onto something or if I'm just totally off base here.

So... look, after buying and selling a few times (once working with RE/MAX and once just doing my own thing), I've come to the conclusion that the market basically levels itself out. A house is going to sell—or be bought—at its actual value regardless. All those prices you see on Zillow are just people's wishful thinking, not what's actually happening in the real world.

cosmicsailor63 said:So... look, after buying and selling a few times (once working with RE/MAX and once just doing my own thing), I've come to the conclusion that the market basically levels itself out. A house is going to sell—or be bought—at its actual value regardless. All those prices you see on Zillow are just people's wishful thinking, not what's actually happening in the real world.

Maybe so.

But I don't know, there still seems to be this massive issue with how many properties are mispriced, which, on one hand, just totally floods the listing sites, and on the other, kind of scares away sellers who won't drop their prices to reality, while also turning off buyers who see those insane asking prices and just move on.

I guess a lot of sellers just fall for what they see in other listings, and because of all those inflated ads, they honestly believe their place is worth way more than it actually is. And then you have both sellers and buyers who just aren't interested in haggling, so a bunch of potential deals just die before they even get off the ground.

In this current setup, it’s entirely possible for someone to list an apartment worth $100,000 for $150,000 for five years straight, and it doesn't cost them anything. Then, if you multiply that by ten different agencies all listing that same place for $150,000, and throw in a hundred potential buyers who would have happily paid $100,000 but never even bother calling because the ad says $150,000... well, nothing happens.

If we actually changed the way these agencies make their money, it would probably completely overhaul how prices are set and how things are advertised. You'd end up with people actually trying to sell, buyers who actually want to buy without all the back-and-forth, and agencies would be charging for the actual work they do based on fair service fees. It wouldn't make sense for an agency to keep a hundred unrealistic listings active just to create a "wide variety of inventory," or to use ninety-nine overpriced homes as "proof" that one specific house at a realistic price is a total steal.

silentridge3 said:Maybe so.

But I don't know, there still seems to be this massive issue with how many properties are mispriced, which, on one hand, just totally floods the listing sites, and on the other, kind of scares away sellers who won't drop their prices to reality, while also turning off buyers who see those insane asking prices and just move on.

I guess a lot of sellers just fall for what they see in other listings, and because of all those inflated ads, they honestly believe their place is worth way more than it actually is. And then you have both sellers and buyers who just aren't interested in haggling, so a bunch of potential deals just die before they even get off the ground.

In this current setup, it’s entirely possible for someone to list an apartment worth $100,000 for $150,000 for five years straight, and it doesn't cost them anything. Then, if you multiply that by ten different agencies all listing that same place for $150,000, and throw in a hundred potential buyers who would have happily paid $100,000 but never even bother calling because the ad says $150,000... well, nothing happens.

If we actually changed the way these agencies make their money, it would probably completely overhaul how prices are set and how things are advertised. You'd end up with people actually trying to sell, buyers who actually want to buy without all the back-and-forth, and agencies would be charging for the actual work they do based on fair service fees. It wouldn't make sense for an agency to keep a hundred unrealistic listings active just to create a "wide variety of inventory," or to use ninety-nine overpriced homes as "proof" that one specific house at a realistic price is a total steal.

So, what's the big deal?
If these sellers aren't in a rush for the cash, they can sit on their property for twenty years for all I care. It's their asset; why should anyone else care what they do with it?

As for the agencies, the real question is why they even exist in the first place. You have the listings right there; you pick one, go see it, and keep going until you find what you need. Brokers are essentially obsolete.

I bought my place through an agency, and honestly, I’d do it all over again because they were fantastic. Back when I was reading a PDF from Housing Solutions, people practically tore me apart for saying something similar, so I’m just hoping I don't catch any heat here 😁. These specific agents worked exactly according to that new model, and it was great—they handled the entire mountain of paperwork, managed all the emails, ran errands to drop off and pick up documents, stood in lines for me, and basically just guided me through the whole ordeal. At the same time, I knew I could just hand everything over to them instead of wasting way more time trying to figure out the logistics myself. I’d much rather spend my hours making extra cash—which, let's be real, is always helpful when you're dealing with the costs of buying and renovating a home.

Their initial asking price was definitely higher than what I was prepared to shell out, but after some negotiating, we landed at roughly double the costs described here as "ideal." Still, I’d pay that money again just for the peace of mind you get when it’s obvious that someone actually knows what they’re doing. Looking at other threads on the forum, it seems like a lot of people have had significantly worse experiences, but I think it's worth mentioning that you can actually have a really smooth ride if you pick the right people.

What I’m looking for when it comes to agencies is someone I can hand the keys to for my rental property—someone who handles the tenants, ensures it stays occupied, manages maintenance, keeps track of the keys, and deals with whatever random issues pop up. Personally, I’d gladly hand over 30% of their commission—maybe even more—just to have that taken off my plate.

I was just sitting here thinking... once you finally get your own agency up and running and start operating with this kind of style, you're going to absolutely clear the field and leave the competition in the dust

p.s. those classified sites haven't been free for quite a while now either

Real estate agencies exist because they respond to the demands of both buyers and sellers. Their sheer volume alone proves they aren't redundant. Sure, someone might just toss a few photos and a zip code onto Craigslist, but even that is significantly more effort than your average private seller puts in. 😁

I honestly don't think anyone would flock to a business model like yours. And let’s be real here—do you really want to be held liable for the legal mess surrounding a property just because some lazy owner neglected their paperwork? Do you actually have the capital to guarantee everything to a buyer? Or is there some massive insurance firm ready to back you up? I highly doubt it. 🤷

People claim that adjusting property taxes will "reinvigorate" the market, but I think both the proponents and the critics are overestimating the long-term impact. The absolute disaster that is the current state of property titles and legal standing isn't going anywhere; it'll plague us for generations.

I can't stand the idea of some agencies trying to charge both sides of a deal.

Look, sorry, but if I didn't hire an agency to find me an apartment, office space, or whatever else, why should I pay anything?

If I haven't hired an agency to sell my property—why am I paying just because the agency has a potential buyer they're working for? They're doing the work for that buyer, not me.

I have zero issues hiring an agency to find or sell a property, and if they actually pull it off, I’ll pay the agreed commission. But I'm certainly not giving up the right to list things myself however and wherever I want. If an agent is actually competent, they'll find what's being looked for and earn their cut.

Over the last year, I've dealt with plenty of agencies. I've also seen listings I wanted to check out, only to spend weeks trying to coordinate, only to find out the place was sold ages ago or the owner is suddenly "unavailable" (???) and so on.

And then there are people like that, where I'm expected to pay a commission for work I didn't even request—they're basically doing it for their own client. 😵

Sure, they usually justify the fee by saying they handle the paperwork and document verification, but sorry—I have my own lawyer for that. I trust my lawyer, and it doesn't cross my mind to pay for a service I don't want or need from an agency. That agency should bill whoever actually hired them, provided that person agreed to it.

Anyway, it's a broken system. If you like it, be my guest. 😁

silvertiger11 said:Real estate agencies exist because they respond to the demands of both buyers and sellers. Their sheer volume alone proves they aren't redundant. Sure, someone might just toss a few photos and a zip code onto Craigslist, but even that is significantly more effort than your average private seller puts in. 😁

I honestly don't think anyone would flock to a business model like yours. And let’s be real here—do you really want to be held liable for the legal mess surrounding a property just because some lazy owner neglected their paperwork? Do you actually have the capital to guarantee everything to a buyer? Or is there some massive insurance firm ready to back you up? I highly doubt it. 🤷

People claim that adjusting property taxes will "reinvigorate" the market, but I think both the proponents and the critics are overestimating the long-term impact. The absolute disaster that is the current state of property titles and legal standing isn't going anywhere; it'll plague us for generations.

You're talking about two different services here: one is connecting a buyer and a seller, and the other is legal consulting and handling the paperwork.

It’s perfectly fine for a client to hire an agent to handle the legal side if a deal closes. But who the hell the other party decides to hire is their business, not the agent's. Charging both sides for the same service is unacceptable.

That said, it's true that more and more agencies are moving toward this approach—charging a commission only to their own client while placing zero obligations on the other party to enter the transaction.

In my view, agencies are perfectly fine, though they become most useful when you're buying or selling property outside your own immediate area—even then, how much effort they actually put into the sale can be hit or miss.
We’re actually dealing with a situation like that in my family right now. Since it would be a massive headache for us to drop everything and show the house every time a random buyer calls, we’re bringing in a local agency to handle things in that area.
If there had been an office closer to home, we wouldn't bother with them; we don't typically use agents for selling or renting out our properties. They even called me recently, claiming they had a "guaranteed buyer" and asking if they could list my place—honestly, such cheap tactics. 🤦

As for what was mentioned in the first post, I don't think it really matters, since nobody is paying anyone just to walk through a house.
Personally, I’d be willing to offer them 1–2%, even if all they do is snap three mediocre photos and slap some generic, inaccurate description on a listing. Even then, 0.5% to 1% of the price is plenty.

silentridge3 said:If you take a look at that "Housing" PDF, you’ll see a massive amount of negative feedback from people dealing with our local RE/MAX offices. The general vibe I get is that the whole setup is pretty much a useless model where these agencies don't actually provide any real value, and honestly, they might even be doing more harm than good. Most of them act like these "lures" who barely know anything about the properties they represent and won't guarantee a single thing, yet they sit right there as this annoying barrier between the buyer and the seller, taking an absurdly large cut of the money for almost zero service. Usually, their entire job description boils down to slapping together a listing—which is often super vague and filled with those terrible, wide-angle photos without even a floor plan—refreshing the ad once a month on some free site, and then basically just walking a buyer from the sidewalk up to the front door.

I guess one of the biggest headaches for me personally is that this whole system makes it impossible to list realistic prices, which just drags the entire market down. You don't get actual market rates; instead, you just have the same exact apartments sitting there indefinitely at prices that, in most cases, aren't going to lead to a sale. Sales happen minimally, while these agencies just survive by squeezing every possible cent out of those rare transactions, charging amounts that feel totally unrealistic.

You’ll have a dozen different agencies all trying to list the same house, and they start playing these weird little games. For example, they might keep prices artificially high on several listings just so they can push a specific property at what looks like a "deal" by comparison, or they’ll keep ads live for houses that sold a year ago just to pad their inventory. If they manage to "sell"—or rather, list—20 homes in a neighborhood over a year for $2,200 a month when the real value is closer to $1,600, then everyone else in that area starts copying those inflated prices to match. On top of that, that 3-4% slice of the pie that goes to these agencies isn't nothing; it really does scare people off from buying or selling altogether. Plus, this model messes with sellers too—they can just let an overpriced ad sit there for three years for free because the agency is footing the advertising bill while pretending to "work" on the sale. It’s all just a bunch of motion without any actual movement.

THE OLD MODEL (bad):

AGENCY JOB: Listing the place, showing it to buyers.
PAYMENT: A one-time, massive fee upon closing that is way out of proportion to the work done (often taken from people who didn't even want to deal with an agency in the first place).
AGENCY ROLE: A roadblock between the buyer and seller; they aren't responsible for anything, don't need to know the details of the house, and are basically just gambling on whether they'll see a check in the future.

THE NEW MODEL (my suggestion):

AGENCY JOB: Listing the property, showing it to buyers, gathering honest info about the home, verifying paperwork/titles, and assisting with the transaction to keep both sides safe.
PAYMENT STRUCTURE:
- Property listing - $17, once a month (paid by the seller)
- Showing the property to a buyer - $167 ($83 from each side)
- Gathering property information - $83 (paid by the interested buyer)
- Verifying property documents/title - $167 (paid by the interested buyer)
- Transaction assistance for security - $667 from each side
AGENCY ROLE: A service provider that clients choose as needed, charging for specific tasks in real-time so they don't have to wait for a sale to close to get paid.

So, my thought is that an agency should just perform the specific services clients ask for and charge fair, market-driven rates for them—the numbers I listed might be different, but you get the idea. Just a clean, transparent way of doing things. That would allow the market to actually function and prices to stabilize based on reality.

Anyway... I'm no economist. Let me know if I'm onto something or if I'm just totally off base here.

I don't know if you've actually sat down to think about this, but according to your model, RE/MAX would be pulling in way more money than they are right now, wouldn't they?

Back when I was buying an apartment about eleven years ago, I also went through an agency. It was some tiny little outfit, clearly just popped up to capitalize on the housing boom, so the owner was basically just trying to grab a slice of the pie.
The whole process went something like this;
1. They originally wanted 3%... I managed to negotiate them down to 2% (which honestly felt like way too much, but hey, at least I got a discount)
2. I demanded they verify all the property paperwork. At first, they tried to dodge it, but I pushed back until they agreed. Of course, I had already done my own due diligence on the documents beforehand, but I wanted to see if the agency would actually do their job or just screw me over... turns out, they did it.
3. When it came time for the handover, they seemed content to just show up and stand there. Again, I had to force them to handle the transition of utilities, cable subscriptions, trash services, and all that junk... they weren't thrilled about it, but they handled it eventually.

Anyway, I wasn't exactly easy on them. I straight-up asked them to their faces what the hell I was paying them for if they weren't going to actually do anything.
Naturally, that agency went belly up, and I actually ran into the former owner about six months ago working in the kitchen of a local ice cream shop.

Nancy Bishop4 said:So, what's the big deal?
If these sellers aren't in a rush for the cash, they can sit on their property for twenty years for all I care. It's their asset; why should anyone else care what they do with it?

As for the agencies, the real question is why they even exist in the first place. You have the listings right there; you pick one, go see it, and keep going until you find what you need. Brokers are essentially obsolete.

Well, I suppose I care for a few different reasons, if you can call them that.

- First off, it makes it impossible for me to actually find an apartment at a realistic, lower price point, because everyone on Craigslist just ends up copying those totally delusional asking prices from one listing to the next, creating this weird loop.
- Then there's the family side of things; my relatives spent fifteen years trying to move one single property—which was supposed to be split up among us—just because they were holding out for some buyer willing to pay a ridiculous premium, all because every other listing on the market was inflated to those same unrealistic levels.
- And honestly, it’s just exhausting because when I'm actually trying to buy something, I have to wade through hundreds of completely useless listings just to find one thing that isn't pure fantasy.

Nicole Nguyen6 said:I don't know if you've actually sat down to think about this, but according to your model, RE/MAX would be pulling in way more money than they are right now, wouldn't they?

Well, let them make it. I mean, why shouldn't they?

But only for actual services rendered, you know, at realistic market rates.

hollowbear6 said:I bought my place through an agency, and honestly, I’d do it all over again because they were fantastic. Back when I was reading a PDF from Housing Solutions, people practically tore me apart for saying something similar, so I’m just hoping I don't catch any heat here 😁. These specific agents worked exactly according to that new model, and it was great—they handled the entire mountain of paperwork, managed all the emails, ran errands to drop off and pick up documents, stood in lines for me, and basically just guided me through the whole ordeal. At the same time, I knew I could just hand everything over to them instead of wasting way more time trying to figure out the logistics myself. I’d much rather spend my hours making extra cash—which, let's be real, is always helpful when you're dealing with the costs of buying and renovating a home.

Their initial asking price was definitely higher than what I was prepared to shell out, but after some negotiating, we landed at roughly double the costs described here as "ideal." Still, I’d pay that money again just for the peace of mind you get when it’s obvious that someone actually knows what they’re doing. Looking at other threads on the forum, it seems like a lot of people have had significantly worse experiences, but I think it's worth mentioning that you can actually have a really smooth ride if you pick the right people.

What I’m looking for when it comes to agencies is someone I can hand the keys to for my rental property—someone who handles the tenants, ensures it stays occupied, manages maintenance, keeps track of the keys, and deals with whatever random issues pop up. Personally, I’d gladly hand over 30% of their commission—maybe even more—just to have that taken off my plate.

Yeah, I guess that’s really the only thing most buyers actually want from an agency.

But then again, buyers should probably be choosing those specific services themselves from a menu of options and paying for each one based on what they actually get.

Instead, we just end up with people paying some flat $5,000 fee to an agency just because they bought a condo, regardless of whether the agency actually did anything helpful at all or if they were basically useless throughout the entire process.

silvertiger11 said:Real estate agencies exist because they respond to the demands of both buyers and sellers. Their sheer volume alone proves they aren't redundant. Sure, someone might just toss a few photos and a zip code onto Craigslist, but even that is significantly more effort than your average private seller puts in. 😁

I honestly don't think anyone would flock to a business model like yours. And let’s be real here—do you really want to be held liable for the legal mess surrounding a property just because some lazy owner neglected their paperwork? Do you actually have the capital to guarantee everything to a buyer? Or is there some massive insurance firm ready to back you up? I highly doubt it. 🤷

People claim that adjusting property taxes will "reinvigorate" the market, but I think both the proponents and the critics are overestimating the long-term impact. The absolute disaster that is the current state of property titles and legal standing isn't going anywhere; it'll plague us for generations.

Could you maybe elaborate on how "agencies respond to buyer requests"? Because, honestly, from everything I’ve ever heard or witnessed, in at least 99% of cases, buyers either don't have any specific demands toward agencies (while paying a fortune for services that basically don't exist), or the agencies simply don't know how to handle—or frankly, just don't want to handle—the actual service requested, like providing accurate info or sorting out paperwork, all while charging prices that are just wildly unrealistic.

silvertiger11 said:Real estate agencies exist because they respond to the demands of both buyers and sellers. Their sheer volume alone proves they aren't redundant. Sure, someone might just toss a few photos and a zip code onto Craigslist, but even that is significantly more effort than your average private seller puts in. 😁

I honestly don't think anyone would flock to a business model like yours. And let’s be real here—do you really want to be held liable for the legal mess surrounding a property just because some lazy owner neglected their paperwork? Do you actually have the capital to guarantee everything to a buyer? Or is there some massive insurance firm ready to back you up? I highly doubt it. 🤷

People claim that adjusting property taxes will "reinvigorate" the market, but I think both the proponents and the critics are overestimating the long-term impact. The absolute disaster that is the current state of property titles and legal standing isn't going anywhere; it'll plague us for generations.

🤔

Wait a second now... are we actually talking about a legitimate profession here, or just people playing amateur?

From what I can see, most "agencies" these days are just a couple of 25-year-olds who call themselves an "agency" simply because they own a smartphone; they probably know next to nothing about the properties or even how housing works, yet they’re looking to make a quick buck without doing any real work.

But in a normal, functioning society, this is supposed to be a profession. A real profession involves tasks, challenges, and complicated jobs that aren't necessarily fast or easy, and it follows that those kinds of jobs are what get paid for. Providing a guarantee to someone is something people pay for, too.

Do you seriously believe that a "profession" consists of taking $5,000 from a buyer just because you posted an ad on Craigslist and walked them from the front gate up to the third floor?

silentridge3 said:Well, I suppose I care for a few different reasons, if you can call them that.

- First off, it makes it impossible for me to actually find an apartment at a realistic, lower price point, because everyone on Craigslist just ends up copying those totally delusional asking prices from one listing to the next, creating this weird loop.
- Then there's the family side of things; my relatives spent fifteen years trying to move one single property—which was supposed to be split up among us—just because they were holding out for some buyer willing to pay a ridiculous premium, all because every other listing on the market was inflated to those same unrealistic levels.
- And honestly, it’s just exhausting because when I'm actually trying to buy something, I have to wade through hundreds of completely useless listings just to find one thing that isn't pure fantasy.

Just because you aren't a fan of those prices doesn't mean they aren't actually happening. Claiming that every single price out there is unrealistic is honestly just absurd.
And here we go again. I’m back to asking the same old question: where exactly do you get the authority to tell someone else what they can or can't write in their own Craigslist ad?

Trying to sell an apartment for 15 years isn't "selling." It’s just waiting for Godot.
There’s no deep philosophy involved in gradually dropping the price until you actually move the property within a year at most.

The reality is that there was clearly zero serious interest in selling. It’s the same story you see with countless properties across America. That’s exactly what I meant in my previous post when I said agencies simply cater to whatever the seller wants to hear.

As for whether a 2-3% commission is too much for work that anyone could basically estimate themselves? Clearly, for many people, it isn't.

Nancy Bishop4 said:Just because you aren't a fan of those prices doesn't mean they aren't actually happening. Claiming that every single price out there is unrealistic is honestly just absurd.
And here we go again. I’m back to asking the same old question: where exactly do you get the authority to tell someone else what they can or can't write in their own Craigslist ad?

Where on earth am I "telling someone what to write in their ad"?

I’m talking about much more fundamental issues here, specifically regarding the totally broken business model—the way they handle billing—of agencies like RE/MAX. It’s almost like if a bar owner decided to give away every single beer—Bud Light, Coors, Miller... whatever—for free, but then charged an insane premium for just one specific brand, say, a Heineken. And then, just to make up for all the money lost on those free beers, they’d charge $300 for that Heineken. Just because you might find some person who, for whatever reason, decides to buy that Heineken for $300 doesn't actually make that price "realistic," nor does it make it reasonable that they had to subsidize all those other beers at $0.00.

As for this whole concept of a "realistic price"...

1. I’ve heard and read quite a bit that apartments actually sell for significantly lower amounts than what is listed in the ads. So, by definition, the asking prices in the listings are unrealistic.

2. I’ve also heard and read that real estate in certain parts of America is way overpriced when you look at the analyses and comparisons with other countries in Europe.

3. In countries where the real estate market is actually well-regulated, people know exactly what things are worth over the long term, which lets a person plan their life using property as a sort of "currency." The "flow"—you know, the volume of transactions—is much higher there precisely because everything is transparent and built on long-term trust. Here in America, most people don't have any kind of transaction flow at all during their entire lives; it feels like one single transaction is considered the absolute peak of a person's real estate journey.

If things functioned differently—if the listed prices were actually grounded in reality—people would be buying and selling a lot more frequently. Sales would increase because more buyers would actually agree to the prices, and sellers wouldn't be stuck waiting forever for some buyer willing to pay an astronomical, unrealistic amount. People would have more freedom to organize their lives. You’d buy a studio in your college years, sell it one autumn, and within fifteen days, buy a two-bedroom. When kids come along, you sell the two-bedroom and within a month, you have a house. When the kids move out, you downsize back to a two-bedroom, and so on. All of this works perfectly fine for the average person if the market is stable and realistic.

But here, only a tiny minority are actually buying and selling. Life can't really flow normally if you lose five full years of your life between selling one place and buying the next because of unrealistic pricing and a stagnant market. And honestly, part of that mess is definitely due to the flawed way these real estate agencies operate.

silvertiger11 said:Trying to sell an apartment for 15 years isn't "selling." It’s just waiting for Godot.
There’s no deep philosophy involved in gradually dropping the price until you actually move the property within a year at most.

The reality is that there was clearly zero serious interest in selling. It’s the same story you see with countless properties across America. That’s exactly what I meant in my previous post when I said agencies simply cater to whatever the seller wants to hear.

As for whether a 2-3% commission is too much for work that anyone could basically estimate themselves? Clearly, for many people, it isn't.

The point wasn't about how agencies cater to the seller's whims, but rather the buyer's. You wrote:

silvertiger11 said:Trying to sell an apartment for 15 years isn't "selling." It’s just waiting for Godot.
There’s no deep philosophy involved in gradually dropping the price until you actually move the property within a year at most.

The reality is that there was clearly zero serious interest in selling. It’s the same story you see with countless properties across America. That’s exactly what I meant in my previous post when I said agencies simply cater to whatever the seller wants to hear.

As for whether a 2-3% commission is too much for work that anyone could basically estimate themselves? Clearly, for many people, it isn't.

How exactly do agencies "respond to requests from buyers, and how does their huge number prove that part"?

And I'm genuinely curious—since you seem to think it's such a monumental task for an agency to actually track down the paperwork for a house and vouch for its legitimacy—what exactly do you think constitutes the profession of a real estate agent?

Just to give a few examples:

- A notary public guarantees certain documents; that is their profession.
- An asphalt worker spends 10 hours out in 100°F heat for $67 a day; that is their profession.
- A surgeon operates on a heart and stakes their reputation on a life for $12 per hour; that is their profession.
- A fisherman wakes up at 3 AM, works hard for 10 hours, and brings home $1333 a month; that is their profession.
- A travel agent sells you a flight and a room in some far-off hotel and guarantees the whole package for a fee (where they personally make maybe 100-$100); that is their profession.
...

So, what is a "real estate agent," really? What is the actual core of their job? Is every person with a smartphone a real estate agent now? Is it just someone whose entire career consists of refreshing an ad on Craigslist? And is that really worth taking $50,000 after some transaction somehow eventually happens? I mean, where is the actual value for the money?