Northern Virginia Real Estate Guide has further thoughts on tailoring real estate commissions to fit the task.
Technorati Tags: blogging, compensation for buyer representation, disintermediation, real estate marketing
There’s always something to howl about.
Northern Virginia Real Estate Guide has further thoughts on tailoring real estate commissions to fit the task.
Technorati Tags: blogging, compensation for buyer representation, disintermediation, real estate marketing
Phil Hoover says:
Just took a quick look at Merv’s post on alternative business models.
Looks like he has some great ideas.
I think the consumer would love to see some more innovative solutions than just being told “it’s X%” when they ask us how much we charge.
I am wondering, however, if the real estate profession (we are NOT an industry and need to stop acting like one!) is ready/willing to go there.
More later, I have to go hand out my refrigerator magnets this morning (I’m KIDDING!) 🙂
October 17, 2006 — 8:28 am
ardell dellaloggia says:
Greg,
1) You note a previous post on Redfin. I think you should go to Redfin’s blog and mention that they have corrected at least some of the things you were complaining about. They do show property now. First they tried it for a fee. Now are they are trying it for free. Oddly that doesn’t seem to be working based on the Refin blog comments.
2) I was disappointed when you posted an ad on your blog that said the set fee for $500,000 was 1%. Just like Redfin, that is simply trading in one “one size fits all” for a lower “one size fits all”. It still doesn’t solve the equation that one guy needs more and another needs less. My exhilaration regarding Merv’s post yesterday was that it appeared to emulate what I do. That is charge based on the needs of each client, and not simply move the marker to another place on the table.
2)
October 18, 2006 — 9:17 am
Greg Swann says:
> They do show property now.
I missed that. Seemingly so did everyone. I’ll take it up later today.
> I was disappointed when you posted an ad on your blog that said the set fee for $500,000 was 1%.
I didn’t say that.
> that is simply trading in one “one size fits all” for a lower “one size fits all”.
That’s not true, either. It would be true to say that I am interested in cherry-picking the business that works well with the business model we’re building (a tautology, really), and that I like the notion of replacing a simple idea with a simple idea. I have no problem with what you or Merv or Eileeen are doing — and we may do something similar with listings — but I also like the idea of being able to “convert” the majority of buyers with a very easy-to-grasp opportunity. Just a different way of marketing the idea.
October 18, 2006 — 9:42 am
ardell dellaloggia says:
I thought the ad read $10,000 back to buyer on a $500,000 property. Isn’t that Redfin verbatim? Not that there’s anything wrong with Refin 🙂
October 18, 2006 — 10:05 am