Years ago, when I lived in Boston, I knew a computer programmer who had no interest in computers outside of work — not even to use, much less play with. I thought this was so weird, because my work completely dominates my attention. It’s all I think about, it’s all I want to talk about, it’s there in the back of my mind no matter what I’m doing.
When Todd Tarson came to visit us, we talked about real estate for every minute he had to spare.
Last night Cathy and I met Russell Shaw in person for the first time. We closed a Mimi’s Restaurant. We got together at 7:30 p.m. and left at midnight, just before they called the cops on us. No liquor, mind you — iced tea, cappuccino and ice-water. But we were drunk all the same, awash in ideas.
We talked about real estate the whole time. Russell is very smart, and very forthcoming with information — as you know from reading him here. We covered a vast horde of topics, from tiny marketing details to big-picture analysis of the NAR/DOJ/FTC fiasc-o-thon.
It was an amazingly wonderful evening for me — my birthday, by chance — entirely my style of living. Cathy has been making notes from memory all morning.
Here’s one concrete plan that came out of our scheming:
We’re going to debate Dual Agency in BloodhoundBlog, with Russell on the affirmative and me on the negative.
Russell is all over the idea that, while forbidding Dual Agency with buyers can make sense for us, we should not rule it out for sellers. He makes a very compelling case, and he may yet carry the day.
But, as the the great Arizona patriot Sam Steiger used to say, we’re just a wave, we’re not the water. The issue is bigger than either one of us can cover. I know there are many stout defenders of Dual Agency from whom we have heard nothing. Opponents may have arguments we have not yet considered. Either way, marshall your positions and tell us what we’re getting wrong.
I’ll post something in the next day or two. With luck, we can have the whole issue settled for good and all by Thanksgiving. Or — maybe not…
Technorati Tags: arizona, arizona real estate, blogging, dual agency, phoenix, phoenix real estate, real estate marketing
Jeff Brown says:
Debating dual agency is like debating whether to enjoy Thanksgiving with family.
My anticipation is already in high gear, though I’ve heard (I think) all the arguments for both sides.
Most if not all of this debate comes down to one issue: Is the integrity of the broker/agent impeccable? The rest is for entertainment only.
As usual Greg, you’ve chosen a topic pregnant with potential.
November 15, 2006 — 4:15 pm
jf.sellsius says:
Happy Birthday Greg.
November 15, 2006 — 5:04 pm
Doug Quance says:
Yes… happy birthday, Greg!
This should make for an exciting discussion.
I side with you, Greg – I don’t do dual agency. Never have.
I look forward to Russell’s reasoning. I doubt he will sway my thinking – but I’m open to it.
November 15, 2006 — 8:05 pm
Todd Tarson says:
Happy Birthday Greg.
You may know how I side on the argument, but really my beef is with the agent that ‘only’ likes to sell his/her listings and collect what is traditionally ‘both’ sides of a commission.
Dual agency can be done and I think a good professional agent can deliver, as long as all parties agree and have full disclosure.
November 16, 2006 — 2:14 pm
ardell dellaloggia says:
Happy belated birthday! When I come I don’t want to talk about real estate…I want to go shopping with Cathy! Make a note Cathleen.
November 17, 2006 — 1:23 am
Cathleen Collins says:
Oh Ardell! You sing my song!
November 17, 2006 — 8:44 pm